Case 3311590/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Margetts, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311590/2023
- Decision date
- 17 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lewis
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr P Secher, Ms L Venner
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms E Margetts, Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 3, 4 and 6 June 2025, with chambers on 5 June 2025, the tribunal consisting of Employment Judge Lewis, Mr P Secher and Ms L Venner unanimously found for the claimant on both pleaded claims. It held that averaging the claimant's interview score for the post of Islington Operational Lead, and not offering her the post as a result, was indirect sex discrimination contrary to section 19 of the Equality Act 2010 and also less favourable treatment because of her status as a part-time worker contrary to the Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000.
The judgment treats the same appointment decision as the factual basis for both successful claims. It does not identify any separate remedy by claim, but records a single award of £19,000 for injury to feelings together with £3,165 interest. The interest was calculated at 8% from 9 May 2023 to 6 June 2025, stated in the judgment as 760 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal held that averaging the claimant's interview score for the post of Islington Operational Lead, and not offering her the post as a result, was indirect sex discrimination contrary to section 19 of the Equality Act 2010. The judgment does not apportion the monetary award between this claim and the successful Part-Time Workers Regulations claim. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Part-time worker regulations | The tribunal held that averaging the claimant's interview score for the post of Islington Operational Lead, and not offering her the post as a result, amounted to less favourable treatment because of her status as a part-time worker contrary to the Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000. The judgment does not specify a separate monetary award for this claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £22,165
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 19 Equality Act 2010
- Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000
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.