Case 2202236/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Florquin v The Royal Bank of Canada (London Branch) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2202236/2019
- Decision date
- 20 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Snelson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Florquin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Snelson recorded, in a rule 52 judgment dated 16 April 2020, that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The judgment was sent to the parties on 20 April 2020.
No findings on liability, limitation, or remedy were made in this judgment. It records only that the case ended because the claimant withdrew the claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment is a rule 52 withdrawal judgment and records that the proceedings were dismissed after the claimant withdrew the claim. The underlying claim label comes from the case context; the judgment itself does not separate the complaints. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment is a rule 52 withdrawal judgment and records that the proceedings were dismissed after the claimant withdrew the claim. The underlying claim label comes from the case context; the judgment itself does not separate the complaints. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment is a rule 52 withdrawal judgment and records that the proceedings were dismissed after the claimant withdrew the claim. The underlying claim label comes from the case context; the judgment itself does not separate the complaints. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
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.