Case 2407757/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Rachel Brown v The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs HELD AT: Liverpool (remote, by CVP) — 2025
- Case reference
- 2407757/2023
- Decision date
- 8 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Rachel Brown
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public preliminary hearing, the Tribunal considered limitation and related preliminary issues in joined proceedings. For Case 1, case number 2407757/2023, claims 1 to 4 were allegations of detriments arising from protected disclosures under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal held that those claims were not presented within the applicable time limit and that it had been reasonably practicable to present them in time.
The Tribunal also considered Case 1 claims 5 and 6, which were allegations of detriments arising from protected acts under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. It held that those claims were not presented within the applicable time limit and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. As a result, all Case 1 claims were dismissed.
The prompt text was truncated, but the judgment section and conclusion state the outcomes for Case 1. No monetary remedy was awarded because the claims were dismissed at the preliminary stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Case 1 claims 1, 2, 3 and 4 involved allegations of detriments arising from protected disclosure under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996. They were dismissed because they were not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to present them in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | Case 1 claims 5 and 6 involved allegations of detriments arising from protected acts under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. They were dismissed because they were not presented within the applicable time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 27 of the Equality Act 2010
- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
- Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100, 67 ER 313
- res judicata
- Rule 38(1)(a)
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.