Case 1300865/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Harty (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1300865/2022
- Decision date
- 12 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gaskell Date
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms S Harty (Counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham on 11 and 12 April 2023, Employment Judge Gaskell heard the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay. The judgment records that all four claims were dismissed because the claimant withdrew them.
The tribunal also recorded that the respondent made no application for costs. No monetary award was made and no substantive liability findings were set out in the judgment beyond the fact of withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal recorded that this claim was dismissed upon being withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal recorded that this claim was dismissed upon being withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that this claim was dismissed upon being withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to this as a claim for unpaid wages and records that it was dismissed upon being withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.