Case 2308411/2020 · Employment Tribunal
E Warren v Travelopia Holdings Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2308411/2020
- Decision date
- 6 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E Warren
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing judgment before Employment Judge L Burge at London South on 17 November 2021. The tribunal held that Travelopia Holdings Limited was the correct respondent. It then considered time limits and withdrawal issues rather than the substantive merits of the claims.
The Claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because it was presented outside the applicable time limits. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have presented that claim in time, so no extension was allowed for the unfair dismissal complaint.
By contrast, the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend the applicable time limits in respect of the Claimant's pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim, so that claim was permitted to proceed. The judgment does not determine the merits of that claim.
The Claimant's redundancy payment claim and claim for 'other payments' were dismissed upon withdrawal. No monetary award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because it was presented outside the applicable time limits and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have presented it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis, so this claim was allowed to proceed; the merits were not decided in this preliminary judgment. | Other | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded as dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The claim for 'other payments' was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- 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.