Case 3334771/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Cobham-Wilson v London Borough of Enfield — 2021
- Case reference
- 3334771/2018
- Decision date
- 10 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown
- Venue
- by Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Cobham-Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 10 March 2021, Employment Judge Brown, sitting alone by Cloud Video Platform, dealt with jurisdiction only. The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s Equality Act 2010 complaints, her complaint of an unauthorised deduction from wages, or her breach of contract claim.
The written judgment records the statutory bases for those rulings as section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. No liability findings were made on the merits and no monetary award was recorded.
The decision note states that reasons were given orally on 10 March 2021 and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment refers generically to complaints under the Equality Act 2010 and holds that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider them. The case listing identifies race discrimination as one of the pleaded discrimination categories. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment refers generically to complaints under the Equality Act 2010 and holds that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider them. The case listing identifies sex discrimination as one of the pleaded discrimination categories. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s complaint of an unauthorised deduction from wages under section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s breach of contract claim, referring to article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- section 23(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- article 7 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.