Case 2408905/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Wilkinson v Lancaster University — 2025
- Case reference
- 2408905/2023
- Decision date
- 27 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Wilkinson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 21 March 2025, at Manchester by CVP, Regional Employment Judge Franey heard the respondent's applications to strike out Mrs R Wilkinson's complaints against Lancaster University. The complaints identified in the judgment were direct age discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and harassment related to age contrary to section 26 of the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal dismissed the respondent's applications. The written record therefore shows that the complaints were not struck out, but it does not record any substantive merits findings on either claim.
The decision notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. As a result, the public record contains only the procedural outcome of the strike-out applications and no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The respondent's application to strike out this complaint was dismissed. The written record does not determine the merits of the underlying claim. | Other | Age | — |
| Harassment | The respondent's application to strike out this complaint was dismissed. The written record does not determine the merits of the underlying claim. | Other | Age | — |
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.