Case 3311657/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Jain (Free v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3311657/2021
- Decision date
- 3 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Freshwater Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs N Jain (Free
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as a Prison Custody Officer from 9 July 2018 until her dismissal on 30 April 2021. At case management she withdrew her age, race, sex discrimination and holiday pay claims, leaving claims for unfair dismissal, automatically unfair dismissal and whistleblowing detriment. The hearing before Employment Judge Freshwater was a preliminary hearing limited to whether the claim had been presented in time and, if not, whether time should be extended.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim under s.98 ERA 1996 struck out at the preliminary hearing because no valid ET1 had been presented before the ACAS early conciliation certificate was obtained. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Automatically unfair dismissal claim under s.103A ERA 1996 struck out on the same jurisdictional basis. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Whistleblowing detriment claim under s.47B ERA 1996 struck out on the same jurisdictional basis. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.18A Employment Tribunals Act 1996
- Rule 8(1) Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 85(2) Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 13 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Miss J Pryce v Baxterstorey Limited (2022) EAT 61
- Thomas v Nationwide Building Society ET/1601342/14
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.