Case 1302961/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sharon Millar v Kevin Stevens t/a KCS Asset Management — 2024
- Case reference
- 1302961/2024
- Decision date
- 12 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Sharon Millar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this short PHCM order, Employment Judge Murdin recorded that the claimant's claims against E5 living Limited and/or E5 Living (UK) Limited were dismissed upon withdrawal. The order does not give any merits findings on those claims or explain their legal basis in the extracted text.
The Tribunal also recorded that the claimant's claims for discrimination arising from sexual orientation, notice pay and holiday pay were dismissed upon withdrawal. No liability findings, legal tests, or factual findings on the substance of the claims are set out in the judgment text supplied.
No monetary award is recorded, and the order contains no remedy calculations. The disposal is limited to withdrawal of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the claimant's claims against E5 living Limited and/or E5 Living (UK) Limited were dismissed upon withdrawal, but the extracted text does not specify the legal basis for those claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for discrimination arising from sexual orientation was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sexual orientation | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's notice pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the claimant's holiday pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.