Case 4100021/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Shennan v Mr L Meighan — 2022
- Case reference
- 4100021/2020
- Decision date
- 24 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Shennan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim had already been struck out on 19 January 2021. It also recorded that the claim against the original first respondent, Keen to Kleen Ltd, had been dismissed on 14 April 2022, and that the response of the remaining respondent, Mr L Meighan, was dismissed by operation of an unless order with effect from 20 July 2022.
The remaining claim for sexual harassment against Mr Meighan succeeded. The extracted text does not set out the tribunal's full oral reasons, but it states that oral reasons were given at the end of the hearing.
The tribunal awarded compensation of £1,427.38 for financial losses and £11,769.59 for injury to feelings. Each figure is stated to include interest at 8%, and the total compensation ordered payable to the claimant was £13,196.97.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the unfair dismissal claim had been struck out on 19 January 2021. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The extracted text records that the claim against the original first respondent, Keen to Kleen Ltd, was dismissed on 14 April 2022, but it does not identify the legal label for that claim in the excerpt. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The claim for sexual harassment succeeded against Mr L Meighan. The tribunal awarded £1,427.38 for financial losses and £11,769.59 for injury to feelings, with both figures stated to include interest at 8%. | Upheld | Sex | £13,197 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,197
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,427
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.