Vol. I·6 May 2026

Search the index

Loading…

Loading page content.

Tribunal Watch

A structured, cross-cut index of UK employment tribunal decisions, built from the primary record at gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Independent of HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice.

Not legal advice. Information on this site is a matter of public record; it is not guidance on any individual case.

Editorial

About this site
Methodology
Corrections policy
Editorial standards

Rights & privacy

Open Government Licence v3.0
Privacy notice
Data subject requests
Atom feed (recent decisions)

Miss J Hawkins v R1: Mr John Lingard R2: Mr John Lingard c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC R3: Ms S Davies c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC — Employment Tribunal 2019 | Tribunal Watch

Tribunal Watch/R1: Mr John Lingard R2: Mr John Lingard c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC R3: Ms S Davies c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC/1811404/2018

Case 1811404/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Miss J Hawkins v R1: Mr John Lingard R2: Mr John Lingard c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC R3: Ms S Davies c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC — 2019

Case reference: 1811404/2018
Decision date: 17 July 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Rostant Date

Indexed: 29 April 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss J Hawkins

Respondent

R1: Mr John Lingard R2: Mr John Lingard c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC R3: Ms S Davies c/o Sharlston Rovers ARLFC

Claims brought

3 categories

Redundancy
Unfair dismissal
Unlawful deduction from wages

Source tags (gov.uk)

Redundancy
Unfair Dismissal and Unlawful Deduction from Wages

Outcomes per claim are extracted in a second pass and are not yet published on this page.

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Judgment 1 (PDF) ↗

Judgment 2 (PDF) ↗

Judgment 3 (PDF) ↗

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.