Case 2216203/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Weigang Yan v Westminster City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 2216203/2023
- Decision date
- 28 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
- Venue
- in person at the Central London Tribunal
- Panel members
- Ms Thayyiba Shaah, Mr T Cook
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Weigang Yan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe unanimous Tribunal, sitting at Central London (Employment Judge Woodhead with Ms Thayyiba Shaah and Mr T Cook), heard the claim of Ms Weigang Yan against Westminster City Council over six hearing days in November and December 2024. The Claimant brought complaints of direct race discrimination, direct sex discrimination, harassment related to race and sex, victimisation, unauthorised deductions from wages and breach of contract, arising from the conduct of her line managers, her failed probation (and extended probation), and the termination of her employment effective 6 October 2023.
The Tribunal dismissed all complaints, finding that none were well-founded. The discrimination, harassment and victimisation complaints under sections 13, 26 and 27 of the Equality Act 2010 were not made out on the evidence. The unlawful deductions and breach of contract complaints — which concerned an alleged £187.07 shortfall in salary for 1-6 October 2023 and a £980 pay award for the period 1 April to 30 August 2023 — were also dismissed; the Respondent had acknowledged that the Claimant could apply for the £980 pay award and had explained the process for doing so.
The Tribunal also refused an in-hearing application by the Claimant to amend her claim to add a pension-related complaint, applying the principles in Selkent Bus Company v Moore and Vaughan v Modality Partnership and concluding that the legal basis for the proposed amendment was not clear and that the balance of prejudice did not favour granting it.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination under s.13 Equality Act 2010 — not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination under s.13 Equality Act 2010 — not well-founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race under s.26 Equality Act 2010 — not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to sex under s.26 Equality Act 2010 — not well-founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation under s.27 Equality Act 2010 — not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim covered pay for 1-6 October 2023 (alleged £187.07 shortfall) and a pay award for 1 April 2023 to 30 August 2023 (£980) — not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract complaint regarding the same alleged unpaid amounts — not well-founded. | Dismissed |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Section 13 Equality Act 2010
- Section 26 Equality Act 2010
- Section 27 Equality Act 2010
- Selkent Bus Company v Moore [1996] ICR 836
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership UKEAT/0147/20/BA
- Rule 2 overriding objective
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.