Case 1801076/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Veyron v AESSEAL plc PRELIMINARY HEARING Heard: In Leeds — 2021
- Case reference
- 1801076/2021
- Decision date
- 5 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Veyron
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in Leeds on 4 May 2021 before Employment Judge JM Wade. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The judgment records that the hearing was in person and that an interpreter was present.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant's Equality Act complaints, said to concern conduct by a colleague referred to as "Casey" and complained about to the respondent on or before March 2020, were dismissed. The reason given is that the claimant confirmed at the hearing that those complaints were not being pursued.
No remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment. The extracted text does not identify the particular protected characteristic or characteristics relied on, and it does not set out any substantive liability findings beyond the dismissal following the claimant's decision not to pursue the complaints.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment refers only to unspecified Equality Act complaints about conduct by colleague 'Casey' complained of on or before March 2020. The protected characteristic(s) and any separate heads of claim are not identified in the extracted text. The claimant confirmed at the hearing that the complaints were not pursued. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.