Case 2502459/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Hennell-Whittington v W Metcalfe & Sons Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2502459/2022
- Decision date
- 22 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram
- Venue
- Newcastle
- Panel members
- Ms D Newey, Mr S Wykes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Hennell-Whittington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Newcastle Employment Tribunal via CVP on 18 to 22 September 2023 before Employment Judge Jeram, Ms D Newey and Mr S Wykes. The claimant, Ms E Hennell-Whittington, appeared in person and the respondent, W Metcalfe & Sons Ltd, was represented by counsel.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s claims of sex discrimination and harassment related to sex were not well founded and dismissed both claims. The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were provided in the decision unless requested in accordance with the note on the judgment.
No monetary remedy was awarded because both claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.