Case 1801293/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Frew (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801293/2020
- Decision date
- 6 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Frew (counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis short judgment, heard by Employment Judge Davies by CVP on 5 October 2020, does not record any substantive findings on liability. It notes the parties' appearances and then records that the parties had liberty to apply to the Tribunal by 26 October 2020.
The only disposition recorded is that, if no application was made by that date, the claims would be dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. No remedy was assessed, and the judgment does not contain findings on the merits of the pleaded claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states the parties had liberty to apply by 26 October 2020 and that, if no application was made, the claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the parties had liberty to apply by 26 October 2020 and that, if no application was made, the claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states the parties had liberty to apply by 26 October 2020 and that, if no application was made, the claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the parties had liberty to apply by 26 October 2020 and that, if no application was made, the claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.