Case 2500350/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Linsley v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs — 2017
- Case reference
- 2500350/2017
- Decision date
- 23 June 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Linsley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claimant withdrew the complaints of direct disability discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and indirect disability discrimination under section 19 of the Equality Act 2010. Those complaints were dismissed following withdrawal.
The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims would proceed to a full hearing. No remedy or monetary award was addressed in this withdrawal judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of indirect disability discrimination under section 19 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 19 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.