Case 2601999/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Wood v Henrietta Birgel — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601999/2019
- Decision date
- 24 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a short withdrawal order in case 2601999/2019. It records that the proceedings brought by Mrs L Wood against Henrietta Birgel were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. No substantive findings on liability were made.
The judgment does not record any remedy, hearing evidence, or legal analysis beyond the dismissal on withdrawal. On the material supplied, the case ended before determination of the underlying employment claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The underlying listing category indicates breach of contract, but the judgment text does not set out the substantive facts. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The underlying listing category indicates redundancy and unlawful deduction from wages, but the judgment text does not set out the substantive facts. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The underlying listing category indicates redundancy and unlawful deduction from wages, but the judgment text does not set out the substantive facts. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.