Case 2307253/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Ashton v SEM Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2307253/2020
- Decision date
- 12 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Members
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mr P Adkins, Ms N Christofi
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Ashton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South Employment Tribunal by remote video hearing on 10-12 January 2022 before Employment Judge Ferguson with lay members Mr P Adkins and Ms N Christofi. The claimant was Miss A Ashton and the respondent was SEM Limited.
The written record contains only the tribunal's dispositive decisions. It states that the complaint of unfair dismissal failed and was dismissed, and that the complaint of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 of the Equality Act 2010 also failed and was dismissed.
No reasons for those outcomes are set out in the written judgment because the tribunal gave reasons orally at the hearing. The notes record that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by a party within 14 days of the decision being sent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records this as a complaint of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.15 Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.