Case 2301747/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Macaulay v Jennifer Holmes and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301747/2022
- Decision date
- 8 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms P Macaulay
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 26 July 2024 before Employment Judge Snelson in London Central, the tribunal considered whether the claimant had established that she was, at any material time, a contract worker for the purposes of section 41 of the Equality Act 2010. It found that she had not done so.
The tribunal also held that it did not have territorial jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s claims. On those jurisdictional grounds, it dismissed all claims in both sets of proceedings.
The short judgment records no merits findings on the underlying discrimination or victimisation allegations and records no monetary award or remedy.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The short preliminary judgment does not identify this claim separately; the published GOV.UK decision page lists race discrimination among the jurisdiction codes, and the tribunal dismissed all claims after the preliminary rulings. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The short preliminary judgment does not identify this claim separately; the published GOV.UK decision page lists sexual orientation discrimination/transsexualism among the jurisdiction codes, and the tribunal dismissed all claims after the preliminary rulings. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Victimisation | The short preliminary judgment does not identify this claim separately; the published GOV.UK decision page lists victimisation discrimination among the jurisdiction codes, and the tribunal dismissed all claims after the preliminary rulings. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Equality Act 2010, s41
- territorial jurisdiction
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.