Case 2600650/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Hussain in person For the v Mr Cameron, employment consultant — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600650/2021
- Decision date
- 18 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Clark
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Hussain in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Hussain was employed on a fixed-term IUC pharmacist contract said to run until 5 October 2020. In September 2020 the respondent said the pilot roles would be restructured and that temporary pharmacists would need to apply for permanent posts. The tribunal found there had been a verbal offer to extend the claimant's contract to 31 October 2020, but on 8 October 2020 she emailed saying her contract had ended on 5 October, that she could not commit to the 15-hour role, and that she wanted to reduce to 7.5 hours. The tribunal treated that email as a rejection of the extension offer and a counteroffer, and found there was no acceptance by performance because she did not work after 5 October. On that basis the contract ended on 5 October 2020 and that date was the effective date of termination.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal held the effective date of termination was 5 October 2020, when the fixed-term contract expired, and that no extension of time was justified. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out for lack of jurisdiction as out of time. The tribunal treated 23 October 2020 as the latest possible deduction date and was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable to bring the claim in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Alternative to the wages claim, insofar as the alleged underpayments could be framed as breach of contract outstanding on termination. Also struck out for lack of jurisdiction as out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination allegation concerning the non-renewal of the fixed-term contract. The tribunal held it was not appropriate to strike it out and extended time on a just and equitable basis; merits were not decided. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability allegation concerning the non-renewal and recruitment decisions. Not struck out; the claim was allowed to proceed to case management. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination |
Legal tests applied
5 references- effective date of termination
- section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- not reasonably practicable
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- just and equitable
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.