Case 1601542/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Hopkin Mrs K Perry v National Trust — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601542/2018
- Decision date
- 15 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge RL Brace
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mrs L Bishop, Ms M Walters
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Hopkin Mrs K Perry
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Cardiff on 6, 7, 8, 11 and 12 November 2019 before Employment Judge RL Brace, sitting with Mrs L Bishop and Ms M Walters. The tribunal unanimously held that both claimants' unfair dismissal claims were not well founded and were dismissed.
It also dismissed Mrs R Hopkin's disability discrimination claims, recorded in the written judgment as a section 15 Equality Act 2010 claim and an indirect discrimination claim under section 19, and dismissed Mrs K Perry's sex discrimination claim under section 19 Equality Act 2010. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and does not set out any monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Both claimants' claims of unfair dismissal were found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Mrs R Hopkin's disability discrimination claim under section 15 Equality Act 2010 was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Mrs R Hopkin's indirect disability discrimination claim under section 19 Equality Act 2010 was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | Mrs K Perry's sex discrimination claim under section 19 Equality Act 2010 was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | 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.