Case 1300059/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1300059/2020
- Decision date
- 7 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Richardson Signed
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal at Croydon, in a preliminary hearing on 3 and 4 December 2020 before Employment Judge A Richardson, unanimously dismissed the Claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal. The written judgment does not set out the tribunal's substantive reasoning; it states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and would not be provided in writing unless requested.
The tribunal also dismissed the Claimant's sex discrimination claim. No separate remedy was awarded, and the written record contains only the dispositive outcomes rather than detailed findings or compensation calculations.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment records the claim as constructive unfair dismissal and dismisses it. Written reasons were not provided in the record because reasons were given orally at the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records that the sex discrimination claim failed and was dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the record because reasons were given orally at the hearing. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.