Ms A Claxton-Mayer v Gateshead Council (The LA) and others: 2501791/2020
| Judgment Date | 25 March 2021 |
| Citation | 2501791/2020 |
| Published date | 23 April 2021 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Subject Matter | Disability Discrimination |
Case Number 2501791/20 (V)
1
THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant Respondents
Ms Alexandra Claxton-Mayer Gateshead Council (“the LA”)
The Frontline Organisation (“Frontline”)
University of Bedfordshire (“the University”)
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
AT A PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING by telephone
HELD AT NEWCASTLE by CVP ON 24 MARCH 2021
EMPLOYMENT JUDGE GARNON
Appearances
Claimant in person
The LA Ms B. Clayton of Counsel
Frontline Ms J. Connolly of Counsel
The University Mr S. Ahmed of Counsel
JUDGMENT
1. The claim against the third respondent is withdrawn, but will not be dismissed under Rule as the
claimant reserves the right to proceed in a Civil Court.
2. The claims against the first and second respondent were presented outside the time limit for
doing so. It is not just and equitable to hear them notwithstanding that, so they are dismissed.
NOTES AND REASONS
1. The claims are under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA) relying on the protected characteristic of
disability. At a Private Preliminary Hearing (PrPH) on 7 January 2021, I recorded not all claims were
against all respondents. Rules 51 and 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 ( the
Rules) provide
51. Where a claimant informs the Tribunal, either in writing or in the course of a hearing, that a
claim, or part of it, is withdrawn, the claim, or part, comes to an end, subject to any application that
the respondent may make for a costs, preparation time or wasted costs order.
52. Where a claim, or part of it, has been withdrawn under rule 51, the Tribunal shall issue a
judgment dismissing it (which means that the claimant may not commence a further claim against
the respondent raising the same, or substantially the same, complaint) unless—
(a) the claimant has expressed at the time of withdrawal a wish to reserve the right to bring such a
further claim and the Tribunal is satisfied that there would be legitimate reason for doing so; or
(b) the Tribunal believes that to issue such a judgment would not be in the interests of justice.
To continue reading
Request your trial