Claimant v Mrs Audrey Sentinella
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal found the webinar in May 2021 was not designed to humiliate the claimant, was held for genuine reasons, and that the claimant was not mentioned by name. The tribunal also found this complaint fell outside section 53 EqA 2010 and was out of time.
Tribunal found the webinar was not harassment related to sex. It was held for genuine reasons following loss of accreditation, was not designed to humiliate, and fell outside the scope of section 53 Equality Act 2010.
Complaint concerning removal of Christian Science Nurse card/accreditation in May 2023 failed. Tribunal found this was not related to race but was due to serious concerns about care at Charton Manor and culture of fear, affecting all senior management.
Tribunal found the decision to remove the claimant's card was not related to sex. The decision affected all three members of the senior management team (all black women) and was based on inspection findings about poor care and management.
Complaint about failure to respond to complaint letter of 7 July 2023 failed. The letter was a complaint about Mrs Sentinella rather than an appeal about removal of card. Tribunal found the claimant's statement did not even mention this incident, so could not constitute harassment.
Tribunal found the failure to respond substantively to the claimant's letter of 7 July 2023 did not violate her dignity or create an intimidating environment. The letter was not an appeal and there was no evidence this upset the claimant.
Tribunal found no less favourable treatment related to race. The webinar, removal of card, and handling of complaint were all explicable by reference to inspection findings, culture issues, and concerns about care. There was no evidence these were tainted by race discrimination.
Tribunal noted sex discrimination was barely mentioned in the claim. The tribunal found no less favourable treatment on grounds of sex. All actions were explicable by reference to legitimate concerns about care and management at Charton Manor.
Facts
The claimant, a black woman, worked as a Christian Science Nurse from 1995 and became Administrator of Charton Manor in 2019 after a controversial appointment process. In 2021, the facility lost its accreditation following a Commission inspection which found multiple failings. A webinar was held to explain this to the wider community. In 2023, following further serious concerns about care, neglect, poor judgment, and a culture of fear, the claimant's personal accreditation as a Christian Science Nurse was withdrawn along with two other senior managers. She complained this was race and sex discrimination.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found the webinar was held for legitimate reasons and was not designed to humiliate the claimant. The removal of her accreditation was due to serious and well-documented concerns about care and management at Charton Manor, not race or sex. The harassment complaints also fell outside the scope of section 53 Equality Act 2010 which governs qualification body liability. The webinar complaint was also out of time.
Practical note
Claims against qualification bodies under section 53 Equality Act 2010 have a narrower scope than employment claims: harassment protection only covers the conferment of qualifications, not their withdrawal, and 'detriment' provisions relate to removing or varying qualifications, not other acts like holding informational webinars.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2305841/2023
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- charity
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Administrator / Head of Nursing / Christian Science Nurse
- Service
- 28 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No