Case 2600540/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Danni Edgar v ERS Medical — 2023
- Case reference
- 2600540/2023
- Decision date
- 1 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Danni Edgar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Danni Edgar brought consolidated claims against ERS Medical alleging sex discrimination and harassment arising from events on 14 April 2022 in an ambulance, including allegations that a male colleague made unwanted sexual advances, exposed himself and sexually assaulted her. She also said the respondent did not do enough to deal with her complaint or protect her from that colleague after the incident.
The preliminary hearing was concerned only with time limits. Early conciliation began on 9 March 2023 and the certificate was dated 13 March 2023, so the claims were well outside the three-month limit in section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010. The respondent invited strike out or a deposit order on the basis that the claims had little or no reasonable prospect of success, but the judge said those issues were not for determination at this stage because no response had yet been presented and there were factual issues that should be decided by a full tribunal.
Applying the authorities cited, including British Coal v Keeble, Abedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Robertson v Bexley Community Centre, Mills and CPS v Marshall, Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust and Rathakrishnan v Pizza Express (Restaurants), the judge accepted the claimant's evidence that she did not know about Employment Tribunals or the possibility of bringing a claim until a Universal Credit officer mentioned it. The judge also accepted her account of anxiety and treatment, including propranolol, and noted that she had reported the matter to the police and obtained a crime number.
The judge found that the claimant had acted quickly once she became aware of the tribunal route, and that the respondent had not identified concrete reasons why a fair trial would be impossible or materially unfair at this stage. The balance of prejudice favoured the claimant, and time was extended on a just and equitable basis under section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 so that the claims could proceed. No findings on liability or remedy were made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Preliminary ruling only: the claim was out of time but time was extended under section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 so it could proceed. No merits determination was made. | Other | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Preliminary ruling only: the claim was out of time but time was extended under section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 so it could proceed. No merits determination was made. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- British Coal v Keeble
- Abedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- Mills and CPS v Marshall
- Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust
- Rathakrishnan v Pizza Express (Restaurants)
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.