Case 1600322/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Threader v The Chief Constable of Gwent Police — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600322/2022
- Decision date
- 13 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Threader
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment records a single determination: Miss D Threader's application under Rule 76 for a costs order against the Chief Constable of Gwent Police was unsuccessful. The hearing took place at Cardiff by CVP on 12 December 2022 before Employment Judge C Sharp sitting alone, with Mr C Banham appearing for the Claimant and Mr J Wynne for the Respondent.
The written record does not set out the tribunal's oral reasons in detail. It states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons were not provided unless requested in accordance with the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure 2013.
No substantive employment claim or monetary award is recorded in the written judgment. The only outcome stated in the document is the refusal of the Rule 76 costs application.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The Claimant's application under Rule 76 for a costs order against the Respondent was unsuccessful. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons were not provided. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 76 ETR 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.