Case 2404819/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Austin v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs — 2020
- Case reference
- 2404819/2019
- Decision date
- 26 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buzzard REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Austin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew her sex discrimination claims, and those claims were dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal struck out the victimisation claim. It found that the claim had been presented significantly outside the relevant time limit, that no evidence had been presented to explain why it had not been brought in time, and that the claim would in any event have had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal also dealt with harassment allegations. Claims relating to pension provider letters around 27 January 2019 and a request to access the claimant's file on 17 January 2019 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The remaining harassment claims were dismissed as out of time, with no evidence presented to support extending time. The judgment expressly stated that the unfair dismissal claim and the Equality Act 2010 section 15 and sections 20/21 discrimination claims were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's claims of sex discrimination were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation claim was struck out because it was presented significantly outside the time limit without evidence explaining the delay and was also found to have no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | Harassment claims concerning letters from the pension provider around 27 January 2019 and the request to access the claimant's file on 17 January 2019 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The protected characteristic for these harassment allegations is not specified in the judgment text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | The remaining harassment claims were dismissed because they were presented significantly outside the time limit and the tribunal did not find it just and equitable to extend time. The protected characteristic for these harassment allegations is not specified in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- just and equitable to extend time
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.