Case 3311925/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Russell v Iris Group Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3311925/2020
- Decision date
- 6 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Porter
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Ms F Potter, Mr A Schooler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Russell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 6 February 2023, the parties told the tribunal that they had agreed terms of settlement. Employment Judge Porter, sitting with Ms F Potter and Mr A Schooler, therefore stayed the hearing so that the settlement terms, which were not disclosed to the tribunal, could be implemented.
The tribunal ordered that if neither party applied by 20 February 2023 for the case to be restored to the hearing list, the matter would be treated as withdrawn by the claimant upon settlement and would stand dismissed on that basis without further order. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally and that no written reasons would follow unless requested in time.
No findings were made on the merits of the underlying claim and no monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The parties agreed terms of settlement at the hearing on 6 February 2023. The tribunal stayed the hearing to allow implementation of the undisclosed settlement terms and provided that, if neither party applied by 20 February 2023 for the case to be restored to the hearing list, it would be treated as withdrawn by the claimant upon settlement and dismissed without further order. | Settled | Age | — |
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.