Case 2402431/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Amar v Hays Specialist Recruitment Ltd and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 2402431/2019
- Decision date
- 18 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Dated
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss M Amar
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the proceedings against Hays Specialist Recruitment Limited, the first respondent, were dismissed following the claimant's withdrawal of the claims. The judgment does not identify the specific claims withdrawn against that respondent.
The Tribunal also recorded that the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, victimisation and failure to make reasonable adjustments against Jet2.com Limited, the second respondent, were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The judgment stated that the claimant's remaining claims against the second respondent were unaffected and would proceed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The proceedings against the first respondent were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; the judgment does not specify the claim types withdrawn against the first respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant against the second respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant against the second respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The failure to make reasonable adjustments claim against the second respondent was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
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.