Cases3311375/2024

Claimant v London Borough of Haringey

17 November 2025Before Employment Judge AnnandWatfordremote video

Outcome

Partly successful

Individual claims

Harassment(religion)withdrawn

The claimant withdrew the harassment related to religion complaint against the second respondent. The tribunal dismissed the claim following this withdrawal.

Victimisationwithdrawn

The claimant withdrew the victimisation complaint against the second respondent. The tribunal dismissed the claim following this withdrawal.

Otherstruck out

The claim under the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 regulation 3 was struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) because the tribunal determined it had no reasonable prospect of success.

Victimisationnot determined

The respondent's application to strike out the claimant's victimisation claim was refused by the tribunal. The claim will proceed to full hearing.

Facts

The claimant, Marjana Begum, brought claims against London Borough of Haringey and Toyin-Shelley Crowl including harassment related to religion, victimisation, and a claim under the Fixed-term Employees Regulations 2002. The respondent applied to strike out certain claims. A preliminary hearing was held by video at Watford Employment Tribunal on 11 November 2025.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the harassment and victimisation claims against the second respondent following withdrawal by the claimant. The fixed-term employee claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. However, the tribunal refused the respondent's application to strike out the victimisation claim, which will proceed.

Practical note

A claim under the Fixed-term Employees Regulations can be struck out at a preliminary hearing if it has no reasonable prospect of success, but tribunals may refuse to strike out victimisation claims where there are genuine issues to be determined.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 reg 3Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure Rule 38(1)(a)

Case details

Case number
3311375/2024
Decision date
17 November 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
London Borough of Haringey
Sector
local government
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor