Curtis v Ministry of Defence [2024] EAT 161
Appeal against decision the ET had no jurisdiction to hear pregnancy discrimination claims brought by an RAF sergeant.
The claimant passed a Promotions Board which meant that she was eligible for promotion to Sergeant but for which she required a full fitness certificate to undertake all the roles the promotion could afford. However, she sustained an injury and was medically downgraded, though she was scheduled to attend a medical board for assessment. Prior to that assessment taking place, the claimant discovered she was pregnant, the board was cancelled and she was unable to apply for a post which became available. She was subsequently appointed but argued that the cancellation had long term, negative, consequences for her career and career extension. The Employment Judge struck out the claim as the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider claims from serving members of the armed forces unless the complaint had been the subject of a Service Complaint and not withdrawn: the judge found that was not the case here.
HHJ Tucker allowed the appeal. While serving members of the armed forces can only bring a claim under the EqA 2010 when they have first raised a Service Complaint and it has been subject of an internal investigation, at each stage of that procedure there was a right to be told of any decision, the reasons for it, and then a right to seek review to an independent body, namely the Ombudsman or Tribunal.
Published: 04/09/2025 10:25