Case 2502280/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Murray v Secretary of State for Justice HELD AT: Middlesbrough and Newcastle — 2025
- Case reference
- 2502280/2023
- Decision date
- 16 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
- Panel members
- S Carter, D Winter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Murray
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal, sitting at Middlesbrough and Newcastle before Employment Judge Aspden with members S Carter and D Winter, gave a unanimous judgment dated 17 January 2025. It dismissed Mrs K Murray's unfair dismissal complaint, finding that complaint was not well founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the Equality Act 2010 complaint that the respondent discriminated against the claimant when deciding on a disciplinary sanction. The written record does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning for that decision, and it records that oral reasons were given at the hearing.
The claimant's remaining Equality Act 2010 complaints were struck out because the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to determine them. No remedy or monetary award is recorded in the extract.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the complaint was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Equality Act 2010 complaint that the respondent discriminated against the claimant when deciding on a disciplinary sanction. The extract does not specify the protected characteristic or set out the tribunal's reasons. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's remaining Equality Act 2010 complaints were struck out because the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to determine them; the extract does not specify their subject matter. | Struck out | — | — |
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.