Case 1800951/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Walker v Joalpe International Trading Limited and 4 others — 2020
- Case reference
- 1800951/2020
- Decision date
- 22 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Ms M Walker
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a short Rule 52 withdrawal judgment. It states that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant, Ms M Walker.
No findings of fact or law on the underlying claims were made. The judgment does not record any merits determination on the breach of contract, whistleblowing, sex discrimination, or unfair dismissal claims.
No remedy was awarded and no monetary sums are recorded in the judgment. The only disposal recorded is dismissal of the proceedings after withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; no merits findings were made. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; no merits findings were made. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; no merits findings were made. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; no merits findings were made. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.