Case 2302678/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Macey - Counsel For the v Ms Smith - Counsel — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302678/2017
- Decision date
- 6 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Macey - Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Ashford Employment Tribunal before Employment Judge Martin. The extracted judgment records that the hearing took place on 2 to 6 March 2020 and that the parties were represented by Ms Macey for the Claimant and Ms Smith for the Respondent.
The only substantive outcome recorded in the extracted text is that the tribunal unanimously held that the Claimant’s claims did not succeed and were dismissed. The judgment does not set out separate findings on the individual claims in the extracted text, so the specific reasoning for each claim is not available from the supplied text.
No monetary award is recorded in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states only that the Claimant’s claims did not succeed and were dismissed; it does not separate findings by claim in the extracted text. Classified from the published listing category. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states only that the Claimant’s claims did not succeed and were dismissed; it does not separate findings by claim in the extracted text. Classified from the published listing category. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.