Case 2405083/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Donlan v Mrs K Redshaw — 2022
- Case reference
- 2405083/2022
- Decision date
- 24 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne Representatives
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Donlan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 19 October 2022, Employment Judge Horne considered Miss S Donlan's complaints against Mrs K Redshaw of disability discrimination and discrimination because of pregnancy. Both parties appeared in person, and the hearing was held remotely by video platform with no objection to that format.
The tribunal dismissed both complaints on jurisdictional grounds. It found that the claims had been presented after the expiry of the statutory time limit and decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of either complaint.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the order was sent to the parties on 24 November 2022. The judgment states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in writing within 14 days of the order being sent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction: the complaint was presented after the statutory time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction: the complaint was presented after the statutory time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
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.