Case 6021625/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Gilmour v Red Everwhere (Lincolnshire) Limited t/a RedEverywhere — 2025
- Case reference
- 6021625/2024
- Decision date
- 17 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Gilmour
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs D Gilmour brought complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages and breach of an equality clause under the Equality Act 2010 against Red Everwhere (Lincolnshire) Limited t/a RedEverywhere. The tribunal heard the case at Hull by video on 15, 16 and 17 December 2025 before Employment Judge Miller.
The written record states that both complaints were not well-founded and were dismissed. No separate remedy, liability apportionment, or monetary award is recorded in the judgment text provided.
The judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The extracted written decision therefore records the outcomes only and does not set out further reasoning in writing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Equal pay | The complaint of a breach of an equality clause under the Equality Act 2010 was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.