Case 3200994/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Chesters v StepStart Team Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3200994/2023
- Decision date
- 6 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Townley Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Ms J Clark, Mrs S Jeary
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Chesters
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at East London Hearing Centre on 4, 5 and 6 March 2025 before Employment Judge L Townley, sitting with Ms J Clark and Mrs S Jeary. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by Ms A Acheampong, litigation consultant.
In its unanimous judgment, the tribunal held that the Claimant's claims for automatic unfair dismissal, direct discrimination on the ground of sex, and indirect discrimination on the ground of sex were not well-founded. Each claim was therefore dismissed.
The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note appended to the judgment. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment refers to this as an automatic unfair dismissal claim and says it was not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment dismissed the direct discrimination claim on the ground of sex as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment dismissed the indirect discrimination claim on the ground of sex as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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.