Case 4108823/2021 · Employment Tribunal

member K Pirie Tribunal member J Copland Ms W Moffat v Represented by: In person Arnold Clark Automobiles Limited — 2021

Case reference: 4108823/2021
Decision date: 8 September 2021
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge D Hoey Tribunal
Panel members: K Pirie, J Copland

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

member K Pirie Tribunal member J Copland Ms W Moffat

Respondent

Represented by: In person Arnold Clark Automobiles Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard the case remotely on 30 and 31 August and 1, 2 and 3 September 2021. It held that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was not well founded because she had not been dismissed.

It also held that the claimant's direct discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims under sections 13, 26 and 27 of the Equality Act 2010 were not well founded, and that the unlawful deduction of wages claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded. Each claim was dismissed and no monetary remedy was awarded.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal held that the claimant had not been dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—
Sex discrimination	The judgment states a claim of direct discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010; the protected characteristic is not named in the extracted text and is classified as sex from the case listing.	Dismissed	Sex	—
Harassment	The judgment dismisses an unlawful harassment claim under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010; the protected characteristic is not repeated in the extracted text and is treated as sex from the case listing.	Dismissed	Sex	—
Victimisation	The judgment dismisses a victimisation claim under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010; the protected characteristic is not repeated in the extracted text and is treated as sex from the case listing.	Dismissed	Sex	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found the unlawful deduction of wages claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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.