Case 3333473/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Augustin v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3333473/2018
- Decision date
- 18 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Ms M Harris, Ms A Crighton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Augustin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the case was heard at Watford on 18 November 2019 before Employment Judge George, sitting with Ms M Harris and Ms A Crighton. The claimant was represented by counsel and the respondent was also represented by counsel.
The tribunal did not make findings on the merits of the claims. It dismissed the proceedings following the claimant's withdrawal of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; the claim type is identified from the gov.uk listing category rather than the judgment text itself. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; the claim type is identified from the gov.uk listing category rather than the judgment text itself. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; the claim type is identified from the gov.uk listing category rather than the judgment text itself. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant; the claim type is identified from the gov.uk listing category rather than the judgment text itself. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.