Employment Tribunals

Case Number: 1601357/2020 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mrs A Williams Respondent: Atradius CYC de Seguros Y Rease Heard at: Cardiff (CVP) On: 30 June 2021 Before: Employment Judge R Brace Representation: Claimant: In person Respondent: Mr O James (Counsel) JUDGMENT The Claimant was a disabled person by reason of her anxiety for the purposes of section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times. _________________________________ Employment Judge R Brace Dated: 1 July 2021 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 5 July 2021 ………………………………………………. FOR THE SECRETARY OF EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Mr N Roche Case Number: 2 NOTE: This is a written record of the Tribunal’s decision. Reasons for this decision were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons are not provided unless (a) a party asks for them at the hearing itself or (b) a party makes a written request for them within 14 days of the date on which this written record is sent to the parties. This information is provided in compliance with Rule 62(3) of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure 2013. Case No: 1601357/2020 10.2 Judgment - rule 61 February 2018 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss A Williams Respondent: Atradius CYC SA de Seguros Y Rease Heard at: Remotely by video from Cardiff On: 20 January 2022 Before: Employment Judge Russell Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: Mr O James, Counsel JUDGMENT 1. Paragraphs 36 to 44 (inclusive) of the Rider to the ET1 presented to the Employment Tribunal on 11 June 2020 should be struck out. Any evidence relating to matters contained in these paragraphs is inadmissible on the basis that this evidence relates to matters covered by ‘without prejudice’ privilege. The evidence is also inadmissible on the basis that it relates to pre-termination negotiations pursuant to section 111A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. 2. The complaint contained in the Claim relating to the issue of whether the Claimant could accrue, and subsequently take, flexi-time (the “flexi-time complaint”) was presented outside the time limit contained in section 123(1)(a) of the Equality Act 2010. 3. It is just and equitable to extend time in relation to the flexi-time complaint. The complaint was therefore presented in accordance with section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010. 4. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the flexi-time complaint. Employment Judge Russell Date 21 January 2022 Case No: 1601357/2020 10.2 Judgment - rule 61 February 2018 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 27 January 2022 FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Mr N Roche Notes Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case.