Case 2410956/2021 · Employment Tribunal
in person v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 2410956/2021
- Decision date
- 31 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Warren Signed
- Panel members
- Ms Williams, Miss Heath
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered claims of direct race discrimination brought by Ms JL Barker against the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. It first held that the alleged conduct covered a period of time and that the claim was brought within three months, allowing for any early conciliation period, measured from the end of that period. On that basis, the Tribunal found that it had jurisdiction to hear the claims under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010.
On the merits, the Tribunal held that the claims of direct race discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 were ill founded and dismissed them. No monetary award was made, and the judgment records no separate remedy assessment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal found the direct race discrimination claims were presented within time under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, but held that the claims under section 13 were ill founded and dismissed them. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.