Case 2502243/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Dixon First v Charles Hunter Associates Second Respondent: ICS Umbrella Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 2502243/2019
- Decision date
- 29 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Dixon First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Judgment on Withdrawal under rule 52 dated 24 December 2019. The extracted text records that the proceedings against both respondents, Charles Hunter Associates and ICS Umbrella Limited, were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claims by the claimant, Miss L Dixon First. The judgment contains no substantive findings on liability and no merits determination of the underlying complaints.
No remedy was awarded. The extract does not identify any compensation, basic award, interest, or other monetary order, and it does not record any hearing on the merits. The only recorded outcome is dismissal of the proceedings after withdrawal by the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not specify the underlying claim type in the extracted text; this classification follows the gov.uk listing category and the withdrawal order only records dismissal after withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not specify the underlying claim type in the extracted text; this classification follows the gov.uk listing category and the withdrawal order only records dismissal after withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.