Case 3302764/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Maher v University of Hertfordshire — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302764/2023
- Decision date
- 31 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cowen
- Venue
- Watford Tribunal
- Panel members
- Mrs A Brown, Mrs A Brosnan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Maher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Watford Tribunal on 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30 and 31 July 2025 before Employment Judge Cowen, with Mrs A Brown and Mrs A Brosnan as the lay members. In an oral judgment, it dealt with the claimant's race discrimination and harassment claims arising against the University of Hertfordshire.
The tribunal held that claims 2.1.1 to 2.1.5 in the list of issues, which were direct race discrimination claims, were out of time and that it had no jurisdiction to hear them. It also held that claims 3.2 to 3.6, which were harassment claims, were out of time and outside jurisdiction.
All remaining claims of direct race discrimination and harassment were dismissed. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Claims 2.1.1 to 2.1.5 in the list of issues were held to be out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them; all remaining direct race discrimination claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Claims 3.2 to 3.6 in the list of issues were held to be out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them; all remaining harassment claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.