Case 1404774/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Wayman of Counsel For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1404774/2021
- Decision date
- 22 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr R Wayman of Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment by consent. The Employment Tribunal recorded that terms of settlement had been agreed between the parties in Mrs R A Whittingham’s case against Armorgard Limited, heard on 20 July 2022 before Employment Judge N J Roper.
The tribunal adjourned the case to allow the settlement terms to be implemented. It stated that if neither party applied to re-list the matter for hearing before 31 August 2022, the case would stand dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant as at that date.
No substantive findings were made on the breach of contract or sex discrimination claims, and no monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Judgment by consent records that terms of settlement had been agreed. The case was adjourned to allow implementation of those terms, with dismissal on withdrawal only if no application to re-list was made by 31 August 2022. | Settled | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Judgment by consent records that terms of settlement had been agreed. The case was adjourned to allow implementation of those terms, with dismissal on withdrawal only if no application to re-list was made by 31 August 2022. | Settled | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.