Case 2303389/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Susan Porter v Lambeth Council — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303389/2022
- Decision date
- 7 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hay Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Susan Porter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a Preliminary Hearing on 7 June 2023, Employment Judge Hay considered Mrs Susan Porter's claim against Lambeth Council. The Respondent did not attend and the Claimant appeared in person. The Tribunal dealt with the matter under rule 53 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The Tribunal found that the claim was presented outside the time limit in section 123 of the Equality Act 2010. It also decided that it would not be just and equitable to apply any further time limit. On that basis, the Tribunal held that the claim was one which it had no jurisdiction to consider.
No monetary remedy was awarded or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Preliminary Hearing under rule 53. The Tribunal held the claim was presented outside the time limit in s.123 Equality Act 2010 and decided it would not be just and equitable to extend time, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Other | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 53 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.