Case 4123798/2018 · Employment Tribunal
– I Drysdale S Cardownie Karen Nichol v Belvedere Road In Person Bathgate EH AY Bramble Cottage Constructive Play — 2019
- Case reference
- 4123798/2018
- Decision date
- 9 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R McPherson Members
- Venue
- Edinburgh
- Panel members
- I Drysdale, S Cardownie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
– I Drysdale S Cardownie Karen Nichol
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal unanimously held that the claimant’s age discrimination claim under s13 of the Equality Act 2010 succeeded. It awarded £234.90 for notice pay, £8,394.36 as compensation for loss of earnings under s124(6), and £2,000 for injury to feelings under s119(4). The discrimination-related monetary award therefore totalled £10,629.26.
The separate claim for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars also succeeded, and the tribunal awarded £262 under s38 of the Employment Act 2002. The tribunal further recorded that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 did not apply. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The tribunal held the age discrimination claim succeeded and awarded £234.90 for notice pay, £8,394.36 for loss of earnings, and £2,000 for injury to feelings. | Upheld | Age | £10,629 |
| Other | Claim for failure to provide written statement of employment particulars succeeded; £262 awarded under s38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £262 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,891
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £8,629
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- s13 Equality Act 2010
- s124(6) Equality Act 2010
- s119(4) Equality Act 2010
- s38 Employment Act 2002
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.