Case 3301213/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Sekasi v Boxmoor Primary School and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 3301213/2021
- Decision date
- 7 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Dated
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms S Sekasi
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy email of 11 February 2022, the claimant’s representative notified the tribunal and the respondents that the entire claim was withdrawn. The tribunal found that this meant the claim came to an end on 11 February 2022 under Rule 51, immediately before the listed preliminary hearing on 15 February 2022, which therefore did not take place.
The claimant asked that the claim not be dismissed because she wished to reserve the right to bring proceedings in another jurisdiction. The tribunal recorded that no further details were provided about why the claim was withdrawn, which other jurisdiction was intended, or why that course was reasonable. The respondent sought dismissal, and the claimant later said she intended to bring the same or substantially the same complaint in the civil courts.
Applying Rule 52, the tribunal was not satisfied that there was a legitimate reason to reserve the right to bring a further employment tribunal claim, so Rule 52(a) did not apply. However, the tribunal decided that it was not in the interests of justice to issue a dismissal judgment under Rule 52(b). The result was that the employment tribunal claim had ended by withdrawal, but no dismissal judgment was issued.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claimant’s representative emailed on 11 February 2022 withdrawing the entire employment tribunal claim. The tribunal recorded that the claim came to an end on that date under Rule 51. The tribunal did not determine the underlying merits of any substantive discrimination allegations. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 51
- Rule 52
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.