Case 3312505/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Millin, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3312505/2021
- Decision date
- 14 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms J Buck, Ms C Smith
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms Millin, Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant was not disabled within the meaning of Section 6 and Schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant date, so it had no jurisdiction to consider her direct disability discrimination claim. It also dismissed the unfair dismissal claim on jurisdictional grounds, finding it had been presented out of time when it was reasonably practicable to present it within the primary time limit.
The tribunal identified the protected period for the claimant's 2020 pregnancy as ending on 3 September 2020. It dismissed the pregnancy discrimination complaints and the sex discrimination complaint arising from dismissal, finding that the respondent's performance management concerns pre-dated the pregnancy and were consistently documented through the process.
The tribunal accepted that the reasons given for managing the claimant's performance and terminating her employment reflected the reasons operating in the minds of the relevant managers. It found that their actions and treatment of the claimant were not tainted by considerations of sex or pregnancy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant was not disabled within the meaning of Section 6 and Schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant date, so it had no jurisdiction to consider the direct disability discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time and the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it within the primary time limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal dismissed the remaining complaints of discrimination because of pregnancy as not well founded. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal dismissed the complaint that dismissal was direct sex discrimination as not well founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Section 6 and Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- Section 18 Equality Act 2010
- Section 13 Equality Act 2010
- reasonably practicable
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.