Case 3304022/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Vidler v Your Choice (Barnet) Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3304022/2022
- Decision date
- 28 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dick
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mr S Bury, Mrs S Boot
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs E Vidler
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave a unanimous judgment in which claim 3308905/2023 was dismissed upon withdrawal. The written record then records that the complaints of direct race, age and disability discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed, together with the related complaints of harassment linked to race, age and disability.
Claims and outcomes
14 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim 3308905/2023 was dismissed upon withdrawal; the written record does not identify the underlying legal complaint. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to age was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to disability was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.