Case 2304512/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Parker First v Department of Work and Pensions Second Respondent: Mrs Kate Barry — 2019
- Case reference
- 2304512/2018
- Decision date
- 9 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pritchard Representation
- Venue
- Ashford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Parker First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr C Parker's claim of sexual harassment was presented outside the statutory time limit under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010. On that basis, the tribunal said it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claim and dismissed it.
The Second Respondent, Mrs Kate Barry, was dismissed from the proceedings. The judgment also records that the claimant's direct sex discrimination claim against the First Respondent, the Department for Work and Pensions, was to proceed. No merits determination or remedy was made in this written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | Claim of sexual harassment was presented outside the statutory time limit in section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal directed that the claimant's direct sex discrimination claim against the First Respondent shall proceed; this judgment did not determine the merits of that claim. | Other | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 123 Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.