Case 1800759/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Dixon v The Borough Council of Calderdale and others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800759/2023
- Decision date
- 2 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leeds on 2 May 2023, Employment Judge Shepherd recorded that the claimant, Ms V Dixon, had withdrawn the disability discrimination claims. The judgment states that those claims were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. No merits findings were made on this page.
The judgment also records that the claims against the third respondent, Lisa Hoyle, were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. It then states that the claims against the first and second respondents, The Borough Council of Calderdale and The Governors of Luddenden Church of England School, proceed. No remedy was recorded in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal recorded that the claims of disability discrimination against the respondents were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Other | The tribunal recorded that the claims against the third respondent were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The extracted text does not specify the legal type of those claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.