Case 2602597/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Korzun v The Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police — 2024
- Case reference
- 2602597/2022
- Decision date
- 31 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler Members
- Venue
- Leicester
- Panel members
- Mrs J Barrowclough, Ms R Wills
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Korzun
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Leicester on 13 and 14 May 2024 before Employment Judge M Butler, sitting with Mrs J Barrowclough and Ms R Wills. The Claimant was represented by Mr J Feeny and the Respondent by Mr A Roberts.
The judgment records that the claims of discrimination and harassment on the grounds of race and religion or belief were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. No substantive liability findings are set out in the judgment beyond that recorded withdrawal.
The tribunal made no order for costs.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the discrimination and harassment claims on the grounds of race were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment states that the discrimination and harassment claims on the grounds of religion or belief were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The judgment groups harassment with the discrimination claims and dismisses it on 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 | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.