Case 3305541/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the First v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3305541/2024
- Decision date
- 30 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Moore Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the First
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was employed by the First Respondent and seconded to the Second Respondent. She brought claims including race discrimination, breach of contract/wrongful dismissal, holiday pay and arrears of pay after her secondment ended and she was dismissed by the First Respondent.
The tribunal struck out the breach of contract, arrears of pay and holiday pay claims against the Second Respondent because the Claimant had no contractual arrangement with it, although those claims remained against the First Respondent. The tribunal did not strike out the race discrimination claim against the Second Respondent, finding that the pleaded matters were capable of amounting to detriments under s.41 EqA and that the claim did not have no reasonable prospect or little reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal also considered a timing point. Although the claim appeared on its face to be one day out of time, the tribunal noted the Claimant's argument that it was lodged in time and the possibility of a just and equitable extension.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract/wrongful dismissal claim was struck out as against the Second Respondent only because the Claimant's contract was with the First Respondent. The claim remained as against the First Respondent. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The arrears of pay claim was struck out as against the Second Respondent only because the Claimant's contract was with the First Respondent. The claim remained as against the First Respondent. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim was struck out as against the Second Respondent only because the Claimant's contract was with the First Respondent. The claim remained as against the First Respondent. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal dismissed the Second Respondent's strike-out application and deposit order application in respect of race discrimination. This was not a final determination of the discrimination claim. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
- rule 40 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
- s.41 Equality Act 2010
- s.41(1)(d) Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension of 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.