Case 2301146/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Grant v Nando’s Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2301146/2019
- Decision date
- 5 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Grant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wright issued a Rule 21 judgment on 5 December 2019 after the respondent failed to provide a response. The judgment states that the claim succeeds.
The judgment does not set out separate findings or reasons for each underlying claim, and it does not assess compensation. It records that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Rule 21 judgment; the respondent failed to provide a response. The judgment states that the claim succeeds and that remedy will be determined at a Remedy Hearing, without separate reasons. | Upheld | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Rule 21 judgment; the respondent failed to provide a response. The judgment states that the claim succeeds and that remedy will be determined at a Remedy Hearing, without separate reasons. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment; the respondent failed to provide a response. The judgment states that the claim succeeds and that remedy will be determined at a Remedy Hearing, without separate reasons. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.