Case 6001326/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Sakwe v Methodist Homes — 2024
- Case reference
- 6001326/2024
- Decision date
- 30 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Sakwe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 30 August 2024 before Employment Judge Maidment, Ms Sakwe withdrew her disability discrimination complaint, and the tribunal dismissed that complaint on that basis. No merits determination or remedy was recorded for that claim.
The tribunal held that the claimant's whistleblowing detriment complaint and automatic unfair dismissal complaint were outside the applicable time limits. It found that it was not reasonably practicable for those claims to have been presented in time, so it had no jurisdiction to hear them and struck them out.
For the race claims, the tribunal extended time only on a just and equitable basis for the complaints relating to the respondent's referral of the claimant to the NMC and/or DBS. The remainder of the direct race discrimination, race-related harassment and victimisation complaints were also out of time, and the tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time for them, so those parts were struck out.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant's complaint of disability discrimination was dismissed upon her withdrawal of it. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal held that the whistleblowing detriment complaint was presented outside the applicable time limit and that it was not reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment refers to an automatic unfair dismissal complaint; the tribunal held that it was out of time and struck it out for want of jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis only for the part of the direct race discrimination complaint concerning the respondent's referral of the claimant to the NMC and/or DBS. The remaining race discrimination complaints were struck out as out of time. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis only for the race-related harassment complaint concerning the respondent's referral of the claimant to the NMC and/or DBS. The remaining race-related harassment complaints were struck out as out of time. | Other | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis only for the victimisation complaint concerning the respondent's referral of the claimant to the NMC and/or DBS. The remaining victimisation complaints were struck out as out of time. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- just and equitable to extend time
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.