Mrs G Heaviside v Taylor Shaw Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 2502235/2019
Decision date: 27 August 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Johnson Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs G Heaviside

Respondent

Taylor Shaw Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment in which the respondent failed to present a response. On the information available to Employment Judge Johnson Date, the tribunal found that the claimant's claims were well-founded and succeeded. The claims identified in the judgment were unfair dismissal, unlawful disability discrimination, and automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures.

The judgment did not record any liability analysis beyond that finding, and it did not determine remedy. Instead, the hearing listed for 4 September 2019 was converted into a remedy hearing. No monetary award is stated in the judgment text provided.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment records that the claim of unfair dismissal was well-founded under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—
Disability discrimination	The judgment records that the claim of unlawful disability discrimination was well-founded under Rule 21.	Upheld	Disability	—
Whistleblowing	The judgment records that the claim of automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures was well-founded under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.