Case 2302905/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. S Forsyth (Employment Case Worker) For the v Steven Fitzgerald — 2019
- Case reference
- 2302905/2018
- Decision date
- 1 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams-Parish Members
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Dr. R Fernando, Ms. R Bailey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. S Forsyth (Employment Case Worker) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 1 November 2019 before Employment Judge Hyams-Parish, with Dr. R Fernando and Ms. R Bailey sitting as members, the respondent did not attend. The written judgment records that the claimant’s claim of victimisation was well founded and therefore succeeded.
The tribunal awarded £2,000 for injury to feelings and £270.46 interest on that sum. No other remedy is recorded in the written decision.
The record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The extracted judgment therefore records the outcome and remedy, but not the tribunal’s detailed reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the claim of victimisation was well founded and succeeds. The tribunal awarded £2,000 for injury to feelings and £270.46 interest. | Upheld | — | £2,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,270
- 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.