Case 1601566/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Agarwal v Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board — 2020
- Case reference
- 1601566/2019
- Decision date
- 26 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harfield
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Agarwal
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew her complaints of direct race discrimination, victimisation and harassment. Those complaints were dismissed upon withdrawal.
The judgment stated, for the avoidance of doubt, that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal and "other payments" continued. It also recorded that the "other payments" complaint was, at that time, subject to a stay under the case management order of 6 January 2020. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The judgment states that the complaint of harassment was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The protected characteristic is inferred from the listing category and the associated direct race discrimination complaint. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of direct race discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the complaint of victimisation was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The protected characteristic is inferred from the listing category and the associated direct race discrimination complaint. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
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.