Case 3207426/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Brown v London Borough of Waltham Forest — 2022
- Case reference
- 3207426/2021
- Decision date
- 25 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Brown
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider Ms Brown's constructive unfair dismissal claim. The claim had been presented outside the statutory time limit, and the Tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time.
The Tribunal also held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claims of failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability, disability discrimination harassment, indirect sex discrimination, and race discrimination. Those claims were presented outside the statutory three month time limit, and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time.
The judgment recorded that the equal pay claim was listed for a full merits hearing on 24, 25 and 26 January 2024, so no outcome on that claim was determined in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The Tribunal found it did not have jurisdiction because the constructive unfair dismissal claim was presented outside the statutory time limit when it was reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was presented outside the statutory three month time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was presented outside the statutory three month time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Disability discrimination harassment was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was presented outside the statutory three month time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | Indirect sex discrimination was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was presented outside the statutory three month time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination |
Legal tests applied
4 references- statutory time limit
- reasonably practicable
- statutory three month time limit
- just and equitable to extend time
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.