Case 3312521/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms I Kaneva v The London Borough of Haringey — 2022
- Case reference
- 3312521/2021
- Decision date
- 15 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms I Kaneva
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningDuring the hearing, the claimant's representative unequivocally withdrew two complaints on behalf of the claimant. The withdrawn complaints were that the absence of a self-defence policy and the wording of the Code of Conduct each amounted to a contravention of the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal dismissed those complaints following withdrawal. The judgment stated that this did not prevent the claimant from referring to the absence of a self-defence policy or the wording of the Code of Conduct as background information, provided it was relevant to the remaining complaints.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The complaint that the absence of a self-defence policy amounted to a contravention of the Equality Act 2010 was unequivocally withdrawn by the claimant's representative and dismissed following withdrawal. The judgment does not identify a protected characteristic for this withdrawn complaint. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The complaint that the wording of the Code of Conduct amounted to a contravention of the Equality Act 2010 was unequivocally withdrawn by the claimant's representative and dismissed following withdrawal. The judgment does not identify a protected characteristic for this withdrawn complaint. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.