Case 2407932/2023 · Employment Tribunal
A McAuley v National Crime Agency PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2024
- Case reference
- 2407932/2023
- Decision date
- 13 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A McAuley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 10 September 2024 before Employment Judge Batten, the tribunal held that the claimant was a disabled person at the material time by reason of dyslexia and menopause symptoms. The hearing was conducted by video platform, with the claimant represented by a solicitor and the respondent by counsel.
The tribunal also held that the claimant’s complaints of harassment and direct discrimination because of sex and/or sexual orientation were not brought within the relevant time limit in section 123 of the Equality Act 2021, and that it was not just and equitable to extend time for those complaints to proceed. Those complaints were therefore not allowed to go forward.
The complaints of disability discrimination and victimisation were permitted to proceed to the final hearing listed for 17-19 March 2025 and 9-11 April 2025. This judgment did not determine the merits of those complaints, and it recorded no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The tribunal held the harassment complaints because of sex and/or sexual orientation were presented outside the time limit and refused to extend time to allow them to proceed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The direct discrimination complaints because of sex and/or sexual orientation were held to be out of time, and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held the claimant was a disabled person at the material time by reason of dyslexia and menopause symptoms, and this complaint was allowed to proceed to the final hearing; no merits determination was made. | Other | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation complaint was allowed to proceed to the final hearing; no merits determination was made. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.123 Equality Act 2021 time limit and just and equitable extension
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.