Case 2201237/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Colney v St George International Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2201237/2019
- Decision date
- 15 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Colney
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been received to the claim, and the Employment Judge considered the information available. The respondent’s title was amended to St George International Limited. On that basis, the tribunal found that Ms L Colney had been unfairly dismissed and that she was entitled to a redundancy payment.
The tribunal also found that Ms Colney had been subject to pregnancy/maternity discrimination. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay her for accrued annual leave and had made unlawful deductions from her pay. The judgment did not set out the monetary remedy in this liability decision because remedy was to be determined at a later hearing.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability judgment only; remedy was listed for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal recorded that the Claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment; remedy was deferred. | Upheld | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that the Claimant was subject to pregnancy/maternity discrimination; remedy was deferred. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the Respondent failed to pay the Claimant for accrued annual leave; remedy was deferred. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the Respondent made unlawful deductions from the Claimant’s pay; remedy was deferred. | Upheld | — | — |
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.