Case 2303178/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Ms D Lima Morocho v Ballymore Asset Management Ltd — 2022

Case reference: 2303178/2021
Decision date: 17 June 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ferguson Representation
Venue: London South

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms D Lima Morocho

Respondent

Ballymore Asset Management Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At London South Employment Tribunal on 17 June 2022, Employment Judge Ferguson dealt with preliminary issues in Ms D Lima Morocho's case against Ballymore Asset Management Limited. The written judgment records that the tribunal was considering an indirect sex discrimination complaint and a pregnancy discrimination complaint.

The tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend the time limit in respect of the indirect sex discrimination complaint, so the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider that complaint. It also dismissed the respondent's application to strike out the pregnancy discrimination complaint.

The judgment does not determine the merits of either complaint and records no remedy or monetary award.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Sex discrimination	The tribunal held it was just and equitable to extend the time limit for the indirect sex discrimination complaint and therefore had jurisdiction to consider it. The merits were not determined in this judgment.	Other	Sex	—
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination	The tribunal dismissed the respondent's application to strike out the pregnancy discrimination complaint. The merits were not determined in this judgment.	Other	Pregnancy and maternity	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

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.