Claimant v Floorspan Contracts Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found harassment related to age succeeded in relation to allegations at paragraphs 9, 15 and 16 of the particulars of claim, but all other harassment claims failed. The successful claims were presented within the statutory time limit under section 123(2)(b) Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal found direct age discrimination succeeded in relation to allegations at paragraphs 7 and 19 of the particulars of claim, but all other direct discrimination claims failed. The successful claims were presented within the statutory time limit under section 123(2)(b) Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal found the victimisation claim under sections 27 and 39(2) Equality Act 2010 was not well founded and dismissed it in its entirety.
The tribunal found the breach of contract claim relating to notice period was well founded and succeeded.
The holiday pay claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed upon withdrawal pursuant to rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024.
Facts
Miss Bliss brought claims of age-related harassment, direct age discrimination, victimisation, breach of contract for notice period, and holiday pay against her former employer Floorspan Contracts Limited. The case was heard over five days by a full tribunal panel. The claimant was represented by her mother while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal upheld some but not all of the claimant's discrimination claims, specifically finding age harassment succeeded on three specific allegations and direct age discrimination succeeded on two specific allegations. The breach of contract claim for notice period also succeeded. The victimisation claim failed entirely and the holiday pay claim was withdrawn.
Practical note
Age discrimination claims can succeed even where a claimant is lay-represented, but success depends on proving specific allegations rather than broad patterns of treatment.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3311199/2023
- Decision date
- 7 November 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 5
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep