Case 4113776/2021 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4113776/2021 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Jennifer Mallard v BNP Paribas Securities Services — 2022
- Case reference
- 4113776/2021
- Decision date
- 22 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4113776/2021 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Jennifer Mallard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn preparation for the preliminary hearing on 18 February 2022, the claimant submitted an agenda confirming that she wished to withdraw her claims of indirect discrimination on the grounds of disability under section 19 Equality Act 2010, and victimisation on the grounds of disability under section 27 Equality Act 2010.
At the preliminary hearing on 18 February 2022, the claimant confirmed that this remained her wish. The tribunal therefore dismissed both of those claims as withdrawn.
The judgment records that the claimant’s remaining claims, brought under sections 13, 15 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010, continued and were not dismissed by this judgment. No monetary award was made on the claims disposed of in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim under section 19 Equality Act 2010. The claimant confirmed in her agenda before the preliminary hearing, and again at the hearing on 18 February 2022, that she wished to withdraw it; the tribunal therefore dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Claim under section 27 Equality Act 2010. The claimant confirmed in her agenda before the preliminary hearing, and again at the hearing on 18 February 2022, that she wished to withdraw it; the tribunal therefore dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.