Case 2304504/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Godwins (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2304504/2018
- Decision date
- 17 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams-Parish Members
- Venue
- London South
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms E Godwins (Counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 17 September 2019, the Employment Tribunal recorded that, through her counsel, the Claimant confirmed she no longer wished to pursue her claims under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996 concerning protected disclosures. The judgment therefore dismisses those claims upon withdrawal.
The judgment is limited to that procedural disposal. It does not decide the merits of the protected disclosure allegations, and it expressly states that the remaining claims under the same case number were still actively pursued by the Claimant.
No monetary remedy is recorded in this judgment. No findings are made on any discrimination, dismissal, or wages issues in the text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records that the Claimant no longer wished to pursue her Part IVA Employment Rights Act 1996 protected disclosure claims, and that those claims were dismissed upon withdrawal. The remaining claims under the same case number were still actively pursued and are not determined in this judgment. | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.