Case 2201620/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Bonson v Raoul (Hairdressers) Limited and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 2201620/2020
- Decision date
- 2 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Welch Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs A Bonson
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs A Bonson withdrew her complaints against the second respondent, Ms E A Finan, and the tribunal dismissed Ms E A Finan from the proceedings. The judgment then recorded that the complaints of disability discrimination, redundancy payment, notice payment, holiday pay and arrears of pay were dismissed on withdrawal.
The remaining complaints identified for a hearing were unfair/constructive dismissal, age discrimination and unlawful deductions from pay. This short judgment records no findings on the merits of those remaining complaints and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records this complaint as dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment records this complaint as dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The judgment uses the label 'notice payment' and records it as dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records this complaint as dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment uses the label 'arrears of pay' and records it as 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 | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.