Case 4112571/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4112571/2018 & 4112644/2018 Ms J Smith v Securitas Security Services (UK) Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4112571/2018
- Decision date
- 12 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4112571/2018 & 4112644/2018 Ms J Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Ms J Smith and Ms A Paton brought claims against Securitas Security Services (Uk) Ltd. It deals only with the complaint of sex discrimination in relation to Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal stated that this Section 19 sex discrimination complaint had been withdrawn by the claimants and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. The judgment added, for the avoidance of doubt, that the discrimination claim continues in relation to the 1996 and 2010 Acts in both cases.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of sex discrimination in relation to Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010 had been withdrawn by the claimants and was dismissed under Rule 52. It also states that the discrimination claim continues in relation to the 1996 and 2010 Acts in both cases. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010
- Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.