Case 1306792/2020 · Employment Tribunal
V. Smith v Rudd MacNamara Linited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1306792/2020
- Decision date
- 15 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Algazy QC
- Venue
- Birmingham via CVP
- Panel members
- Ms L. Clark, Mr P. Paw
Parties
2 namedClaimant
V. Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Birmingham via CVP on 13 to 15 June 2022 before Employment Judge Algazy QC with Ms L. Clark and Mr P. Paw as members. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The unanimous judgment was that the claim for unfair dismissal was not well founded and was dismissed. The tribunal also found that the claims for sex discrimination and age discrimination were not well founded and were dismissed.
Oral reasons were given at the hearing. The judgment does not record any separate remedy, award, or further factual findings beyond the dismissal of the three claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Age discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Age | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.