Case 3207927/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Jainaba Jallow v East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 3207927/2021
- Decision date
- 15 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Volkmer Members
- Venue
- East London
- Panel members
- Ms G Forrest, Mr L O'Callaghan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Jainaba Jallow
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the direct race and religion discrimination complaints at issues 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 on withdrawal. It dismissed the indirect sex discrimination complaint, the direct race and religion discrimination complaints at issues 2.4.3, 2.4.4 and 2.4.5, and the direct age discrimination complaint because they were not presented within the applicable time limit and it was not just and equitable to extend time.
The direct race and religion discrimination complaints at issues 2.4.6 and 2.4.7 were found not well founded. The Tribunal considered that there were no facts from which it could infer that discrimination might have taken place, and stated that even if the burden had shifted the Respondent had shown the absence of discrimination.
The holiday pay complaint was dismissed. The Tribunal found that the annual leave entitlement referred to in the May 2021 letter was for the whole leave year, that the entitlement was pro-rated when employment ended partway through the leave year, and that the Claimant had taken more holiday than she was entitled to.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The direct race discrimination complaints at issues 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 were dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The direct religion discrimination complaints at issues 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 were dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | The indirect sex discrimination complaint was dismissed because it was out of time and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | The remaining direct race discrimination complaints were dismissed; some were out of time and others were found not well founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The remaining direct religion discrimination complaints were dismissed; some were out of time and others were found not well founded. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Age discrimination | The direct age discrimination complaint was dismissed because it was out of time and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- burden of proof
- 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.