Case 2302179/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Crow (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 2302179/2017
- Decision date
- 17 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms G Mitchell, Mr R Shaw
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr C Crow (Counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis remedy judgment recorded that the claimant's claims for personal injury, injury to feelings and financial losses were upheld. The tribunal quantified the award for financial losses to date of tribunal at £139,545.30, pension loss to date at £1,833.77, future financial loss at £311,306.90, future pension loss at £12,311.47, personal injury/PSLA at £75,000, and injury to feelings at £17,000, producing a subtotal of £556,997.44.
The tribunal then added interest at 8% on past financial loss from the midpoint over 952 days (£29,499.81) and on general damages from 22 March 2017 (£38,392.99), for total interest of £67,892.80 and total damages including interest of £624,890.24. It applied grossing-up to £503,345 of the award, recorded a grossed-up total of £888,286.56, and stated that the total payable to the claimant was £1,009,831.80. The calculations were done in the presence of and with the agreement of both counsel; the judgment noted that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Remedy judgment only; the underlying liability findings are not restated in the supplied text. Classification as sex discrimination is inferred from the case listing and the award heads in the remedy judgment. | Upheld | Sex | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,009,832
- across all upheld claims
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.
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.