Case 2201413/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms.S. Richards-Hargreaves v Faithfull and Gould Ltd and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 2201413/2019
- Decision date
- 28 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Goodman
- Panel members
- Mr R. Pell, Ms K. O’Shaughnessy
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms.S. Richards-Hargreaves
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, comprising Employment Judge Goodman with Mr R. Pell and Ms K. O’Shaughnessy, recorded that the unfair dismissal claim failed because the first respondent’s conduct did not repudiate the contract. It also rejected the race discrimination claim and held that any harassment was not related to race; the written record says those race claims failed for substantially the same reasons as the deposit order of 28 June 2019.
The tribunal recorded that the victimisation claim, the age and sex discrimination claims, and the harassment claims related to age and sex were dismissed on withdrawal. The claims for unlawful deductions from wages, breach of contract, and holiday pay did not succeed. By contrast, the employer contract claim succeeded, and the claimant was ordered to pay the second respondent £10,076.95 to reimburse university fees paid. The claimant’s £1,000 deposit was also ordered to be paid to the first respondent. The written record notes that reasons were given orally and written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
11 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the first respondent's conduct did not repudiate the contract. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found no race discrimination. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal said any harassment was not related to race; the written record says the race discrimination and race harassment claims failed for substantially the same reasons as the deposit order of 28 June 2019. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The judgment groups harassment related to age and sex; dismissed on withdrawal. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,077
- 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.