In person For the v Ms H Pryce, Solicitor — 2021

The claimant presented a claim alleging direct sex discrimination arising from the withdrawal of an offer of employment. At the hearing, she argued that the reason for the withdrawal was her status as a single parent, but the tribunal dealt with the case as a complaint of direct sex discrimination.

The tribunal found that on 30 April 2020 the respondent made two employment options available to the claimant: one at a salary of £60,000 per annum, and another at £40,000 rising to £55,000 after planning permission, together with a 2% shareholding for a £20,000 investment. The claimant said on the same day that she was not in a position to proceed with either option, asked for further discussion, and was treated as having rejected both offers, albeit with an invitation to continue discussions.

Further exchanges in early May 2020 were treated by the tribunal as negotiations rather than a subsisting offer capable of acceptance. The claimant asked whether the respondent had re-evaluated the offer, the respondent said it hoped she would join them but understood if it did not work for her, and on 6 May 2020 the claimant said she needed confidence that she would have a voice and be respected as a leader before she could accept any role. On 9 May 2020 the respondent decided not to pursue employing the claimant and instead that the existing directors would do the work themselves.

The tribunal held that there was no outstanding offer to withdraw when the alleged discriminatory act occurred. Its conclusion was that the claim failed because, at the relevant time, no offer was available for acceptance and there had never been any firm agreement on clear and agreed terms. The complaint that an offer was withdrawn because of sex therefore had no reasonable prospect of success, and the claim was struck out and dismissed.