Case 2301432/2017 · Employment Tribunal
In person but assisted by her brother Mr Webb For the v Mr Robson Solicitor — 2017
- Case reference
- 2301432/2017
- Decision date
- 27 October 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sage Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person but assisted by her brother Mr Webb For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing at London South, Croydon on 26 October 2017 before Employment Judge Sage. The Claimant, Ms M. Petinou, appeared in person and was assisted by her brother, Mr Webb. The Respondent was represented by Mr Robson, solicitor.
The judgment records a single determination: the Claimant’s disability discrimination, race discrimination and whistleblowing complaints were presented in time. No merits findings or remedy were recorded in the extracted text, and the decision appears confined to the limitation issue raised at the preliminary hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The judgment records that the disability discrimination complaint was presented in time. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The judgment records that the race discrimination complaint was presented in time. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Whistleblowing | Preliminary hearing only. The judgment records that the whistleblowing complaint was presented in time. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.