Case 1403792/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Wyatt v Barchester Health Care — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403792/2020
- Decision date
- 1 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Wyatt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a record of a preliminary hearing on 21 June 2021, Employment Judge Midgley heard Mrs K Wyatt's claims against Barchester Health Care in Bristol by CVP. The claimant appeared in person by telephone and the respondent was represented by Mr P Singh, solicitor.
The tribunal recorded that the claim for unpaid wages was dismissed on the claimant's withdrawal. It also recorded that the claims for unpaid annual leave, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and discrimination arising from disability were dismissed because they had been presented out of time and the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear them.
No remedy was awarded. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim of unpaid wages was dismissed on the claimant's withdrawal at the preliminary hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim of unpaid annual leave was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim of discrimination arising from disability was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.