Case 2303817/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Claire Bryant v National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303817/2018
- Decision date
- 16 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Fowell
- Panel members
- Mr P Adkins, Ms L Brooks
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Claire Bryant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was held remotely by video at Ashford on 15 and 16 April 2021 before Employment Judge E Fowell, sitting with Mr P Adkins and Ms L Brooks. The Tribunal's unanimous liability decision was that Ms Claire Bryant was constructively unfairly dismissed, and that her complaints of direct discrimination on grounds of sex and harassment on grounds of sex were upheld.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The Tribunal directed that the remedy hearing would take place on 25 June 2021, and that any further or amended witness statement dealing with remedy should be exchanged within 14 days and copied to the Tribunal before that hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal unanimously found that the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The complaint of direct discrimination on grounds of sex was upheld. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The complaint of harassment on grounds of sex was upheld. | Upheld | Sex | — |
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.