Ms D. Vidal v Harrow Council — 2021

Ms D. Vidal was employed by Harrow Council from 3 February 2006 and worked as an Emergency Planning Officer from 2 October 2007 until dismissal in late May or early June 2019. This preliminary hearing took place on 22 July 2021 in the claimant's absence. The tribunal noted that the claimant had not attended or contacted the tribunal with a reason, and that there had been no application to amend to pursue a sex discrimination claim.

The tribunal struck out the claimant's automatic unfair dismissal claim under s.99 ERA 1996 and her pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim under s.18 Equality Act 2010 because they had no reasonable prospect of success. The pregnancy and maternity allegations linked to the final written warning were rejected because the matters complained of did not fall within the protected period, which ended on 31 December 2017. The separate allegation that the respondent dismissed her because she was pregnant also failed because there was no evidence that the respondent knew she was pregnant when it made the dismissal decision.

The respondent's application to dismiss the ordinary unfair dismissal claim for failure actively to pursue the case was not upheld. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not actively pursued the claim since 30 April 2021 and had not provided a schedule of loss, but it did not dismiss the claim at that hearing. Instead, the claimant was given 21 days to make written representations under rule 37(2) as to why the ordinary unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out.

On holiday pay, the respondent admitted that the claimant was entitled to payment in respect of leave accrued but not taken at the time of dismissal. Judgment was entered for £3,206.02 gross, to be paid subject to tax and national insurance deductions. The case was listed for a further final hearing later in 2021 unless the respondent notified the tribunal that those dates could be vacated.