Case 3200036/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Jessie Unwin v Orminston Academies Trust — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200036/2019
- Decision date
- 22 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Jessie Unwin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis case was heard at East London Employment Tribunal on 22 November 2019 before Employment Judge Burgher, with Mr A Lloyd appearing for the claimant and Mr A Rozycki appearing for the respondent. The judgment records a dismissal judgment only and gives no substantive findings on liability.
The tribunal stated that the claimant's claims were dismissed on withdrawal. No merits decision, legal analysis, or remedy award is set out in the extracted text, and no panel members are listed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The extracted judgment text records that the claimant's claims were dismissed on withdrawal; individual pleaded causes are not listed in the text and this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Withdrawn | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | The extracted judgment text records that the claimant's claims were dismissed on withdrawal; individual pleaded causes are not listed in the text and this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment text records that the claimant's claims were dismissed on withdrawal; no merits determination is recorded. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.