Case 1802887/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Liarna Johnstone v Estée Lauder Cosmetics Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1802887/2021
- Decision date
- 26 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Liarna Johnstone
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the start of the preliminary hearing on 20 August 2021, Miss Johnstone's representative said that she sought to withdraw all claims in both proceedings on the understanding that the respondent would not seek a costs order against her. The respondent's counsel confirmed that there was no extant claim for costs and that costs would not be sought if the claims were withdrawn.
The tribunal recorded that the respondent readily consented to withdrawal. It therefore dismissed all claims in both sets of proceedings at the claimant's request and with the respondent's consent. The claims identified in the judgment were unfair dismissal, discrimination and victimisation because of age and gender, and non-payment of holiday pay.
No merits findings were made on the underlying allegations, and no monetary award was recorded. The judgment is limited to the procedural disposal by withdrawal and consent, together with the assurance that costs would not be pursued.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal at the claimant's request, with the respondent's consent; no merits determination. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Withdrawn with the respondent's consent. The judgment refers to discrimination because of age and gender. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Withdrawn with the respondent's consent. The judgment refers to discrimination because of age and gender. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | Withdrawn with the respondent's consent; no findings on the substance of the claim. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the claim that holiday pay had not been paid was dismissed on withdrawal with the respondent's consent. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.