Case 3300643/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Saracevic Hujic v The Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300643/2023
- Decision date
- 19 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Saracevic Hujic
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs S Saracevic Hujic, a police constable who started work for Northamptonshire Police on 6 April 2021, brought eleven allegations of race and disability discrimination arising from training, tutoring, sickness absence and workplace decisions. The preliminary hearing on 11 September 2023 was confined to limitation. The tribunal recorded that she contacted ACAS on 16 November 2022, received the ACAS certificate on 28 December 2022 and presented her ET1 on 25 January 2023, so allegations before 17 August 2022 were prima facie out of time. Allegations 7 and 11 were accepted by the respondent as in time and were listed to proceed to a final hearing.
Applying section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the continuing act authorities, the tribunal rejected the argument that allegations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9 formed one ongoing situation. It found that the complaints involved different alleged perpetrators, different causes of action, and significant gaps between incidents. The tribunal said there was no direct or indirect connection between most of the allegations and that they were properly characterised as a succession of unconnected or isolated specific acts, with only allegations 1 and 4 having any arguable link because the claimant said the March 2022 childcare refusal followed her earlier complaint about PC Renwick.
The tribunal then considered whether it would be just and equitable to extend time. It found that the claimant had access to the Police Federation from at least March 2022, had made an internal complaint in February 2022, and had not given a credible explanation for waiting until 25 January 2023 after knowing in November 2022 that the claims were significantly out of time. The tribunal took account of her anxiety and periods of sickness absence, but noted that there were also periods when she was back at work or on phased return and that she had been able to pursue the internal complaint process. Balancing prejudice to both parties, the tribunal refused to extend time and dismissed allegations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9; allegations 6 and 10 were dismissed on withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
13 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Allegation 1: alleged direct race discrimination by PC Renwick between April and August 2021. Dismissed as out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Allegation 1: alleged harassment related to race by PC Renwick between April and August 2021. Dismissed as out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Allegation 2: refusal of the claimant's business interest application in April 2022. Dismissed as out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | Allegation 2: alleged failure to make reasonable adjustments and discrimination arising from disability in relation to the business interest refusal. Dismissed as out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Allegation 3: alleged harassment related to race arising from the WhatsApp group disclosure in May 2021. Dismissed as out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- s.140B Equality Act 2010
- Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Hendricks
- Aziz v FDA
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan
- Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- E v X and others
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.