Case 2601046/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. H Selkin v Opico Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2601046/2023
- Decision date
- 26 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap Members
- Panel members
- Ms. D Newton, Mr. Z Sher
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs. H Selkin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claim concerned harassment related to sex, direct sex discrimination, victimisation, unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal. It upheld the harassment claim in part, dismissed the remainder of the harassment complaints, dismissed direct sex discrimination and victimisation, and upheld unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
On victimisation, the tribunal found that the claimant's email about a WhatsApp message on 12 January 2022 amounted to a protected act, while other alleged protected acts were either not made out or too unclear for findings. It accepted that suspension and dismissal were detriments, but found no evidence that Mr Woolway was materially influenced by the protected acts; it found the treatment resulted from following Peninsula advice.
The judgment did not determine remedy. It stated that no remedy evidence had been heard and confirmed the provisional remedy hearing, while noting that the parties could continue to use ACAS to try to resolve remedy.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Victimisation complaints based on suspension and dismissal were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The complaints of harassment contrary to Section 26(1) Equality Act 2010 succeeded in part; the provided judgment text is truncated and does not show the full particulars of which allegations succeeded. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination was dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint of unfair dismissal was well founded and succeeded; remedy was reserved. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The complaint of wrongful dismissal was well founded and succeeded; remedy was reserved. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Section 26(1) Equality Act 2010
- Section 13 Equality Act 2010
- Section 27 Equality Act 2010
- Section 27(2)(d) 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.