Case 3307302/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Farra v Ricoh UK Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3307302/2020
- Decision date
- 9 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Farra
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment made because no response had been received to the claimant's claim. Employment Judge Ord recorded that Mrs C Farra had been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of sex and/or pregnancy/maternity as alleged in the claim form submitted on 23 July 2020.
The judgment was limited to liability and did not determine compensation. It directed that a separate remedy hearing would take place on 26 March 2021 at Employment Tribunals, Trito House, Bury St Edmunds. The order required the claimant to file and serve a schedule of financial loss, supporting documents, a statement of the facts and the acts of discrimination relied on for injury to feelings, witness statements, and any medical evidence relied on for injury to feelings by the dates specified in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant had been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of sex and/or pregnancy/maternity as alleged in the claim form. It does not separate the factual basis for the sex ground from the pregnancy/maternity ground. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant had been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of sex and/or pregnancy/maternity as alleged in the claim form. It does not separate the factual basis for the sex ground from the pregnancy/maternity ground. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
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.