Case 1600473/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms G Doswell v Peniel House Care Home (a partnership of AJ & MO Semhi) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600473/2019
- Decision date
- 16 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Ms W Morgan, Ms L Bishop
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms G Doswell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 15 January 2020 at Cardiff, before Employment Judge C Sharp, Ms W Morgan and Ms L Bishop, the tribunal recorded that Ms G Doswell’s claims of unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, age discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, and breach of contract were withdrawn and dismissed. No remedy was awarded on those claims.
The tribunal also decided the sex discrimination claim. It held that the claim was not well founded and dismissed it after accepting the respondent’s reliance on the statutory defence in section 109 of the Equality Act 2010. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons were not provided unless requested under the tribunal rules.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment records this claim as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment records this claim as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Judgment records this claim as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | Judgment records this claim as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | Sexual orientation | — |
| Breach of contract | Judgment records this claim as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal found the claim was not well founded and dismissed it because the respondent successfully relied on the statutory defence in s.109 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.109 Equality Act 2010 statutory defence
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.