Case 2203881/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Forrest v Silver Bullet Media Services Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203881/2020
- Decision date
- 28 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkin
- Panel members
- Mr D Kendall, Mr F Benson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Forrest
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs L Forrest brought sex discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination claims against Silver Bullet Media Services Ltd. The tribunal, sitting at London Central by telephone on 23-25 June 2021 before Employment Judge Adkin with Mr D Kendall and Mr F Benson, found that the sex discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination claims brought under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 were not well founded and dismissed them.
The judgment also records that all other claims were dismissed on withdrawal. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, and the judgment was sent to the parties on 29 June 2021. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal held the sex discrimination claim under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was not well founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The tribunal held the sexual orientation discrimination claim under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was not well founded. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Other | The judgment states that all other claims were dismissed on withdrawal, but it does not identify those claims individually. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.