Case 1402653/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A C Juke v Quality Care management Ltd (T/A Aquarius Nursing) — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402653/2021
- Decision date
- 8 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A C Juke
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Southampton on 27 July 2022, Employment Judge Rayner dealt with the respondent's application in Mrs A C Juke's unfair constructive dismissal claim. The tribunal struck out allegations and factual matters relating to the claimant not being allowed to return to the post of senior healthcare worker up to and including November 2018, the respondent's alleged failure to support her to develop literacy skills up to and including November 2018, and the allegation that the reason for preventing her return to work was connected with an abuse allegation made against her.
The order meant that paragraphs 5 to 10 of the claimant's particulars of claim were struck out and could not be pursued as breach of contract or otherwise argued before the Employment Tribunal. Paragraphs 5 to 18 of the document headed reasons for resignation were also struck out. The remainder of the claimant's constructive unfair dismissal claim was left to proceed to the final hearing listed for 16 and 17 January 2023.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | On the respondent's application, the tribunal struck out specified allegations and factual matters within the claimant's unfair constructive dismissal claim, rather than determining the whole claim. The struck-out matters concerned her not being allowed to return to the post of senior healthcare worker up to and including November 2018, the respondent's alleged failure to support her literacy skills up to and including November 2018, and the alleged reason for preventing her return to work being connected with an abuse allegation. | Other | — | — |
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.