Case 2501180/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Lewis Respondent Watson Woodhouse Ltd v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 2501180/2025
- Decision date
- 3 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram
- Venue
- Teesside
- Panel members
- Ms C Hunter, Ms P Wright
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs J Lewis Respondent Watson Woodhouse Ltd
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Teesside, chaired by Employment Judge Jeram with Ms C Hunter and Ms P Wright, heard evidence and submissions from 2 to 6 June 2025, with deliberations on 2 July 2025 and judgment on 3 July 2025. It dismissed the claimant Mrs J Lewis's complaint of unfair constructive dismissal, recording that the complaint was not well founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the claimant's complaint of a failure to make reasonable adjustments, again recording that the complaint was not well founded. No monetary remedy was awarded or set out in the written judgment, and no separate figures for compensation, injury to feelings, interest, or any other heads of loss were given.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint of unfair constructive dismissal and states that it was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim was pleaded as a failure to make reasonable adjustments and was dismissed as not well founded. | Dismissed | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.