Case 1309700/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Ms R Dawson – Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 1309700/2020
- Decision date
- 30 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham by video on 16 and 17 September 2021, Employment Judge A Richardson held that Mr S Bromwich's unfair dismissal claim against BSS UK Limited was not well founded and was dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The second page is headed "Schedule to Judgment" and records amendment rulings on a series of EqA 2010 incidents. It states that an indirect discrimination amendment was not allowed; an incident in March 2020 involving K Southern under section 13 was not allowed; incidents involving L Hampton on 9 April 2020 and 30 April 2020 were allowed in respect of race but not disability; incidents involving the Porter and D McNair were not allowed; and an incident involving L Hampton on 14 April 2020 under section 26 was allowed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment disposes only of the unfair dismissal claim. The second page is a schedule of amendment rulings on EqA 2010 incidents and does not record a merits decision on those discrimination matters. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.