Case 3201677/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Venables v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis — 2020
- Case reference
- 3201677/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Venables
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Ms L Venables brought Equality Act 2010 claims against the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis under sections 13, 15 and 26.
Those Equality Act claims were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. The judgment did not determine the merits of those claims and recorded that the claimant's remaining claims would proceed to a hearing commencing on 25 May 2021.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that claims under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. The protected characteristic for the section 13 claim is not identified in the judgment text. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that claims under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that claims under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. The protected characteristic for the harassment claim is not identified in the judgment text. | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.