Case 1300080/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Hodgetts (counsel via ELIPs scheme) For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1300080/2019
- Decision date
- 10 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Miss E Hodgetts (counsel via ELIPs scheme) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final merits hearing in Birmingham on 10 February 2020, before Employment Judge Perry, the tribunal recorded that the remaining claims against Contechs Consulting Limited were dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. The extracted judgment does not identify the individual claim heads beyond the case listing context, but the gov.uk listing category indicates Working Time Regulations and the claim is therefore recorded here as a working time claim.
The judgment contains no substantive findings on liability, no findings of fact on the underlying dispute, and no reference to any legal test. It is a short disposal judgment only. The extracted text also records the appearances for both sides: Miss E Hodgetts for the claimant, via the ELIPs scheme, and Miss L Gould for the respondent.
No remedy was awarded and the judgment does not record any monetary figures. There is nothing in the extracted text to suggest discrimination, injury to feelings, or any other compensatory award. The tribunal's only recorded determination is dismissal of the remaining claims after the claimant's withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the remaining claims were dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. No further merits findings are set out in the extracted text. | 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.