Case 4102215/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Ministry of Justice — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102215/2019
- Decision date
- 28 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Gall Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew complaints of direct discrimination and victimization.
Following that withdrawal, the complaints were dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment does not set out factual findings, merits reasoning, or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the complaint of direct discrimination was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. The protected characteristic is inferred from the gov.uk listing category of Disability Discrimination; the short judgment text itself does not expressly state disability. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the complaint of victimization was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. The judgment text does not identify the protected act or protected characteristic. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52 of the Rules contained in Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.