Case 2201364/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2201364/2023
- Decision date
- 12 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr P Adkins, Ms D Warman
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claimant’s claims for direct sex discrimination, unfair dismissal, holiday pay and wrongful dismissal. It recorded that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were provided unless requested within 14 days.
The claim for direct sex discrimination was not upheld, and the claim for unfair dismissal was also not upheld. The judgment does not set out the tribunal’s reasoning in writing, but those claims were expressly dismissed in the record of the decision.
The holiday pay claim was upheld in the agreed amount of £123.20. The wrongful dismissal claim was also upheld in the agreed amount of £667.50. The total payable by the respondent to the claimant was £790.70.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Amount payable was agreed between the parties at £123.20. | Upheld | — | £123 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Amount payable was agreed between the parties at £667.50. | Upheld | — | £668 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £791
- across all upheld claims
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.