Case 2207168/2018 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Respondent — 2019

Case reference: 2207168/2018
Decision date: 29 August 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Mason
Venue: London Central

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant worked for the respondent as a Senior Data Scientist from 4 June 2018 to 9 November 2018. Her ET1, presented on 20 December 2018, ticked unfair dismissal and sex discrimination, but not pregnancy or maternity discrimination. At this preliminary hearing she sought to amend the claim to add a pregnancy-related dismissal claim and an automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 104(1) Employment Rights Act 1996, said to arise from her having raised a grievance.

Judge Mason applied the amendment guidance in Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore and considered the separate time-limit tests for the proposed claims. For the pregnancy-related claim, the tribunal found there was no basis to extend time on just and equitable grounds. The claimant had not given a clear or coherent explanation for not pleading pregnancy discrimination earlier, despite having researched her employment rights and having contacted ACAS within 10 days of dismissal.

For the section 104(1) claim, the tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented within the limitation period because the claimant had been able to research and present other claims in time. The tribunal therefore found both proposed claims out of time and refused the application to amend. No remedy was awarded at this stage.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination	Proposed amendment to add a pregnancy-related dismissal claim. The tribunal refused permission to amend, holding that the claim was out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time.	Other	Pregnancy and maternity	—
Unfair dismissal	Proposed amendment to add an automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 104(1) Employment Rights Act 1996, said to arise from raising a grievance. The tribunal refused permission to amend, holding that it was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented within the limitation period.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.