Case 1301612/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 1301612/2018
- Decision date
- 24 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis open preliminary hearing was held on 24 July 2019 before Employment Judge Dimbylow in Birmingham. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The written record states that, by consent, the claim appearing at item 4.1.1(a) in the agreed list of issues was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant.
The tribunal also refused and dismissed the respondent’s application to strike out the claims. In the same decision, the tribunal refused and dismissed the claimant’s application to strike out the response. No merits findings were made on the substantive claims in this written judgment, and no remedy was assessed.
The record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days. The extracted text does not identify the legal basis of the withdrawn claim or any protected characteristic relied on in the hearing record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | By consent, the claim at item 4.1.1(a) in the agreed list of issues was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The extracted judgment does not identify the underlying cause of action. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.