Employer file
Since 2017, And/or her representative,25 Mr Bathgate, because they failed in advance to name all relevant comparators in the claim. As a result, it prepared its defence only in relation to the three named comparators, which it believed it was reasonably entitled to do. In fact, those comparators were the only comparators she had named in her evidence. The has appeared as a respondent in 1 employment tribunal case, with £0 in total awards recorded against the employer.
| # | Claim type | Cases | Relative share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Sex discrimination | 1 |
| Case ref. | Decided | Jurisdiction | Claimant | Claim types | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4104196/2023 | 17 March 2024 | Scotland | Ms Nadine-Anne Harkness | Sex discrimination | — |
Data extracted from published employment tribunal judgments on gov.uk. Case reference, decision date, judge, venue and claim categories come from structured metadata. Claimant and respondent names are extracted from the judgment PDF text, and a second LLM-assisted pass adds per-claim outcomes, key findings, and any compensation awarded. Many UK tribunal decisions are liability-only — the remedy is set at a later hearing — so a case can correctly show an outcome with no award figure. See how the data is built.