Case 6008236/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N McGill v Tieto Evry Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008236/2024
- Decision date
- 3 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N McGill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held at London Central on 23 December 2024, Employment Judge A M Snelson sat alone and heard from the claimant, Miss N McGill, and from Mr E Kemp, counsel for Tieto Evry Ltd. The tribunal determined that all claims had no reasonable prospect of success and struck them out. The judgment recorded that, accordingly, the proceedings as a whole were at an end. The decision was entered in the register and sent to the parties on 3 January 2025.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.