Case 3304924/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T Musamadya v Nouvita Limited RECORD OF A PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2024
- Case reference
- 3304924/2023
- Decision date
- 22 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Moore
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms T Musamadya
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims alleging sex discrimination, race discrimination and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010. The issues included alleged sexual harassment by another agency worker in 2019, the respondent's handling of the claimant's January 2020 grievance, and the termination of the claimant's engagement at Baldock Manor Hospital in March 2023 after a parking incident.
The tribunal found that the sexual harassment and related 2020 complaints were brought out of time and that it would not be just and equitable to extend time. In reaching that conclusion, it noted the delay, the limited prejudice to the respondent, and that the complaint appeared weak on its face, including because T was an agency worker and had left before the investigation was completed.
For the 2023 direct sex and race discrimination complaints, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had parked in the hospital grounds despite knowing she was not allowed to do so. It found there were no facts capable of suggesting that the termination decision or alleged reports about parking were because of race or sex, and concluded that those complaints were fanciful, speculative and had no reasonable prospect of success.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination complaints concerning the 2020 handling of the grievance and the 2023 termination of engagement/parking allegations were struck out; the 2020 complaint was out of time and the 2023 complaints had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaints concerning the 2020 handling of the grievance and the 2023 termination of engagement/parking allegations were struck out; the 2020 complaint was out of time and the 2023 complaints had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Harassment | Sexual harassment complaint concerning alleged conduct by T in 2019 was struck out because it was brought out of time and the tribunal found it would not be just and equitable to extend time. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation complaint based on the alleged failure to investigate the claimant's January 2020 grievance was struck out as out of time; the tribunal also described the complaint as weak on its face. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 39 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- s.41(5) Equality Act 2010
- s.109(2) Equality Act 2010
- Ahir v British Airways plc [2017] EWCA Civ 1392
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] ICR 1
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.