Case 2204583/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Pasicka v Aspen Healthcare Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 2204583/2018
- Decision date
- 6 December 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Professor
- Panel members
- Ms S L Saggar-Malik, Ms S Boyce
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Pasicka
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously dismissed the Claimant's discrimination complaints in relation to race and sex, together with the race harassment allegations and the victimisation allegations. It held that complaints 1 to 9 were presented out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time, so the race discrimination allegations in those complaints were dismissed. Complaint 4, which alleged sex discrimination, was also dismissed for the same time-limit reason.
The Tribunal further dismissed the race discrimination allegations in complaints 10 and 11, and dismissed the race harassment allegations in complaints 10 and 11. It also dismissed the victimisation allegations in complaints 10, 11 and 12.
The unfair dismissal complaint was not determined on its merits in this judgment. The record states that it had already been dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant at a preliminary hearing on 6 December 2018 before Employment Judge Mason. No remedy or monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Complaints 1-3 and 5-11 were held out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time; the race discrimination allegations in those complaints were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The race harassment allegations in complaints 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 were dismissed. The judgment records that complaints 1-9 were out of time and not just and equitable to extend time, and that the harassment complaints in 10 and 11 were also dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | Complaint 4, pleaded as unlawful discrimination by reference to sex, was dismissed. It formed part of the group of complaints 1-9 that were found out of time and not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation allegations in complaints 10, 11 and 12 were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint had previously been dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant at a preliminary hearing on 6 December 2018 before Employment Judge Mason. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend time
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.