Case 1600497/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Holderness v Personnel Hygiene Services Limited Mr S Buckley Mr G Brace — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600497/2022
- Decision date
- 9 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Holderness
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was held remotely at Cardiff on 7 November 2022 before Employment Judge R F Powell. The tribunal gave its reasons orally during the hearing, and the written judgment records only the operative orders.
The claim against Mr Stephen Buckley, the 2nd Respondent, was found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal was not satisfied that it was just and equitable to extend the time limit, so that claim was struck out and dismissed.
The same result was reached for Mr Gareth Brace, the 3rd Respondent: the tribunal found that the claim was not presented in time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. That claim was also struck out and dismissed.
As against Personnel Hygiene Services Limited, paragraphs 5 to 8 of the particulars of claim were found to be out of time and not part of a pleaded continuing course of conduct or series of similar acts. Those paragraphs were therefore struck out and dismissed. No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim against Mr Stephen Buckley, the 2nd Respondent: not presented in time and it was not just and equitable to extend the period for presentation. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Claim against Mr Gareth Brace, the 3rd Respondent: not presented in time and it was not just and equitable to extend the period for presentation. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Paragraphs 5 to 8 of the particulars of claim against Personnel Hygiene Services Limited were not presented in time and did not form part of the pleaded continuing course of conduct or series of similar acts. | Struck out | — | — |
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.