Case 1600513/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Phibben and Miss K King v Balfour Beatty Group Employment Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600513/2019
- Decision date
- 19 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mrs P Palmer, Mr P Bradney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Phibben and Miss K King
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claims at Cardiff on 16, 17 and 18 March 2020 before Employment Judge S Jenkins, Mrs P Palmer and Mr P Bradney. The claimants were represented by counsel and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment records that the claimants' claims of direct discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation and harassment on the ground of sexual orientation failed and were dismissed. The respondent's costs application was refused. The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sexual orientation discrimination | Judgment records that the claims of direct discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation failed and were dismissed; written reasons were not included in the supplied judgment text. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Harassment | Judgment records that the claims of harassment on the ground of sexual orientation failed and were dismissed; written reasons were not included in the supplied judgment text. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
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.