Case 1306317/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Cuthill v Birmingham Repertory Theatre Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1306317/2020
- Decision date
- 27 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Jones
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Ms W Stewart, Mr J Wagstaffe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Cuthill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Birmingham, constituted by Employment Judge J Jones with Ms W Stewart and Mr J Wagstaffe, heard the case over 23-27 May 2022. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested. The claimant was Ms D Cuthill and the respondent was Birmingham Repertory Theatre Limited.
All claims were dismissed. The tribunal dismissed the claim of constructive unfair dismissal. It also dismissed the claims of direct race discrimination, harassment because of race, and victimisation.
The tribunal further dismissed the claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments. No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Claim pleaded as constructive unfair dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment because of race claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.