Case 3220561/2020 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Ms T. Brown (2) Mr S. Singh (3) Ms J. Hamilton-Gayle (4) Ms I. Kerr (5) Ms R. Beck (6) Mr I. Ahmed v Ashburn Estates Ltd t/a Troxy — 2021
- Case reference
- 3220561/2020
- Decision date
- 12 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Ms T. Brown (2) Mr S. Singh (3) Ms J. Hamilton-Gayle (4) Ms I. Kerr (5) Ms R. Beck (6) Mr I. Ahmed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the matter at East London Hearing Centre on 12 July 2021 before Employment Judge Massarella. The Claimants were Ms T. Brown, Mr S. Singh, Ms J. Hamilton-Gayle, Ms I. Kerr, Ms R. Beck and Mr I. Ahmed, and the Respondent was Ashburn Estates Ltd t/a Troxy.
The judgment records that the Claimants’ sex discrimination claims and wrongful dismissal claims for notice pay were dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The Tribunal did not record any substantive findings on liability, because the claims were not determined on their merits.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment does not record any remedy assessment. The decision is limited to the procedural disposal of the withdrawn claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52, Sch. 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Notice pay claim dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52, Sch. 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52, Sch. 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.