Case 2303400/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Thorpe v Sainbury’s Supermarkets Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2303400/2019
- Decision date
- 26 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyde Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Thorpe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the Equality Act 2010 complaints of age discrimination, race discrimination, pregnancy and maternity discrimination, and discrimination by reason of religion or belief were dismissed forthwith because the Claimant withdrew them. The complaint in respect of holiday pay was also dismissed forthwith on withdrawal by the Claimant.
The judgment states that the Claimant’s remaining claims would proceed to hearing on 23 September 2020. It also records by consent an amendment to the Respondent’s name from “Sainbury’s Sutton” to “Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited”.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Dismissed forthwith on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed forthwith on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissed forthwith on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed forthwith on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant forthwith. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.