Mrs H Simpson v Lloyds pharmacy — 2019

Case reference: 1404013/2019
Decision date: 3 December 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Bax Date

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs H Simpson

Respondent

Lloyds pharmacy

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a judgment on withdrawal. The tribunal recorded that the claimant, Mrs H Simpson, had withdrawn the claim.

The tribunal therefore dismissed the proceedings against Lloyds Pharmacy under rule 52. The judgment does not set out any substantive findings on liability or remedy.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment records only that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant; the specific claim type is not stated in the judgment text and is inferred from the gov.uk listing categories provided in case context.	Withdrawn	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment records only that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant; the specific claim type is not stated in the judgment text and is inferred from the gov.uk listing categories provided in case context.	Withdrawn	—	—
Working time regulations	The judgment records only that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant; the specific claim type is not stated in the judgment text and is inferred from the gov.uk listing categories provided in case context.	Withdrawn	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.