Case 3305888/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. S. Merritt v Mr. M Bivol Open Preliminary Hearing Heard via: Reading by Cloud Video Platform — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305888/2022
- Decision date
- 9 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Boyes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. S. Merritt
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the open preliminary hearing on 7 February 2023, Employment Judge Boyes considered whether the claimant’s discrimination claims should be struck out for having no reasonable prospects of success. The claimant accepted that she could not pursue marriage/civil partnership discrimination because she was not married or in a civil partnership, withdrew that claim, and the tribunal dismissed it upon withdrawal.
The tribunal identified the remaining sex-related allegations as potentially direct discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and harassment related to sex under section 26. It noted the claimant’s allegations about the 16 March 2021 conversation, later emails while she was on sick leave, and the respondent’s time-limit arguments, but it did not make findings of fact on those disputed matters at this stage.
Applying the strike-out authorities and the low threshold for striking out discrimination claims, the tribunal held that it could not be said on the documents before it that the sex discrimination and harassment claims had no reasonable prospects of success. It therefore refused strike out, made no deposit order, and recorded that the claim would proceed to further case management. The tribunal also noted that the claimant referred to pregnancy discrimination at the hearing, but that point had not been pleaded and would require amendment if pursued.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marriage or civil partnership discrimination | At the open preliminary hearing the claimant accepted she could not pursue marriage/civil partnership discrimination because she was not married or in a civil partnership. The tribunal recorded that the claim was withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Marriage / civil partnership | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal treated the pleaded sex allegations as potentially direct discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010. It held they were not shown to have no reasonable prospects of success and allowed them to proceed. | Other | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal treated the sex allegations as potentially harassment related to sex under section 26 Equality Act 2010. It found the claim was not suitable for strike out on the material before it and could proceed. | Other | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- rule 37(1) ETRP
- Tayside Public Transport Company Limited (t/a Travel Dundee) v Reilly
- Tayside and North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Ezsias
- Anyanwu v South Banks Student Union
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 26 Equality Act 2010
- section 136(2) Equality Act 2010
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.