Case 1600961/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C McIntyre v Persimmon Homes Ltd. HELD AT/BY: Wrexham by CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600961/2022
- Decision date
- 2 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C McIntyre
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing, the tribunal refused the respondent's application for an order striking out the claimant's claim, stating that the refusal was in the interests of justice. The judgment records that the claimant's claim remained the matters specifically alleged in the rider attached to his ET1 claim form presented on 19 August 2022.
The tribunal also refused the claimant's application to amend his claim, including the specific proposed addition of a victimisation claim. On the respondent's application, the claimant was ordered to pay costs of £4,250 plus VAT and counsel's fees of £1,750 plus VAT in respect of the case management preliminary hearings on 22 November 2023 and 31 January 2024.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The decision is a preliminary hearing order. The respondent's application to strike out the claimant's claim was refused, but the underlying unfair dismissal claim was not finally determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Victimisation | The claimant's application to amend his claim to add victimisation was refused. The judgment does not determine a victimisation claim on its merits. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.