Case 1811017/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Union-McGibbon v National Education Union — 2019
- Case reference
- 1811017/2018
- Decision date
- 13 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rostant Appearances
- Venue
- Sheffield in private
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Union-McGibbon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in private at Sheffield on 13 August 2019 before Employment Judge Rostant, the tribunal recorded that Mrs L Union-McGibbon's claims against the National Education Union were dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment lists all claims of direct discrimination by association, alternative harassment claims in boxes 22, 31, 36, 43, 46, 48, 50, 52, 55, 60, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 82, 83, 84, 91, 95, 98 and 100, and an alternative victimisation claim in boxes 39 and 40.
Because the claims were withdrawn, the tribunal made no substantive findings on liability and recorded no monetary award or other remedy. The judgment therefore resolves the proceedings procedurally rather than by deciding the merits of the discrimination, harassment, or victimisation allegations.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination by association; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Alternative harassment claims in boxes 22, 31, 36, 43, 46, 48, 50, 52, 55, 60, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 82, 83, 84, 91, 95, 98 and 100; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Alternative victimisation claim in boxes 39 and 40; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.