Case 2301546/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Ms K Leighton v VR Music Limited (In liquidation) and 2 others — 2019

Case reference: 2301546/2018
Decision date: 18 September 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Balogun Date

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

4 named

Claimant

Ms K Leighton

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

On 18 September 2019, Employment Judge Balogun issued a short dismissal judgment in Ms K Leighton v VR Music Limited (in liquidation) and Ms R Lowe. The order records that the claims of unlawful deduction of wages, indirect discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and holiday pay were dismissed upon withdrawal.

The same order records that the allegation in paragraph 43(1)(a) of the Details of Claim, that a conversation with the second respondent on 15 February 2018 amounted to a protected disclosure, was dismissed upon withdrawal. It also records that the harassment detriment allegation at paragraph 51(d) was dismissed upon withdrawal. The judgment does not set out substantive liability findings or any monetary award.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	Dismissed upon withdrawal.	Withdrawn	—	—
Other	Indirect discrimination claim dismissed upon withdrawal; the extracted text does not identify the protected characteristic.	Withdrawn	—	—
Disability discrimination	Failure to make reasonable adjustments dismissed upon withdrawal.	Withdrawn	Disability	—
Holiday pay	Holiday pay claim dismissed upon withdrawal.	Withdrawn	—	—
Whistleblowing	The order dismisses upon withdrawal the allegation at paragraph 43(1)(a) that a conversation on 15 February 2018 amounted to a protected disclosure, and the paragraph 51(d) harassment detriment allegation.	Withdrawn	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.