Case 3201960/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Marshall v Iqvia Ies UK Ltd and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3201960/2023
- Decision date
- 19 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms P Marshall
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs P Marshall brought a complaint of discrimination because of religion or belief against IQVIA IES UK Ltd and GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited. The judgment records that the case was heard by Tribunal Judge D Brannan, acting as an Employment Judge, at East London Hearing Centre by CVP on 19 June 2024, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondents represented by counsel/solicitors.
The tribunal did not determine the merits of the religion or belief discrimination complaint. Instead, it held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint because it was presented more than three months after the date of the acts complained of and after the end of any period that was just and equitable.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment contains no remedy assessment because the claim was disposed of on the time-limit issue alone.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint because it was brought more than three months after the acts complained of and after the end of any period that was just and equitable. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.