Case 6000889/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Evans v Garlanna UK Ltd and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 6000889/2023
- Decision date
- 13 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Members
- Venue
- Bristol
- Panel members
- Mr H Launder, Mr C Williams
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss A Evans
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Bristol Employment Tribunal on 17, 18 and 19 June 2024, before Employment Judge Ferguson with lay members Mr H Launder and Mr C Williams, the Tribunal dealt with two complaints of race discrimination brought by Miss A Evans against Garlanna UK Ltd and Alan MacNamee. The direct race discrimination complaint was dismissed after the Claimant withdrew it.
The indirect race discrimination complaint was found not well-founded and was dismissed. The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in accordance with the note in the judgment.
No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaint; the judgment records that it was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Indirect race discrimination complaint; the Tribunal said it was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.