Case 4105484/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Gordon v David Lloyd Leisure10 Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105484/2023
- Decision date
- 29 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murphy
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Gordon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant withdrew her complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, together with the parts of her direct sex discrimination and sexual harassment / harassment related to sex complaints that related to the alleged conduct of Dennis Cudidihy, at the preliminary hearing on 29 November 2023. Those withdrawn complaints were dismissed under Rule 52.
The judgment does not determine the merits of the remaining complaints. It states that the remainder of the claimant's complaints will proceed in accordance with the case management note and order of the same date. No remedy or monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was withdrawn by the claimant at the preliminary hearing on 29 November 2023 and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The direct sex discrimination complaint was withdrawn by the claimant at the preliminary hearing on 29 November 2023 only insofar as it related to the alleged conduct of Dennis Cudidihy, and was dismissed under Rule 52. The remainder of the complaint was to proceed. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The complaint of sexual harassment / harassment related to sex was withdrawn by the claimant at the preliminary hearing on 29 November 2023 only insofar as it related to the alleged conduct of Dennis Cudidihy, and was dismissed under Rule 52. The remainder of the complaint was to proceed. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52
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.