Case 1801163/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Caldwell and others Mr M Connor and others v Healthcare Environmental Services Limited (in compulsory liquidation) and 2 others — 2019
- Case reference
- 1801163/2019
- Decision date
- 24 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Date
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr S Caldwell and others Mr M Connor and others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claimants withdrew all claims against Healthcare Environmental (Group) Limited and Healthcare Washroom Service Limited. Those claims were dismissed on withdrawal under rule 52.
Against Healthcare Environmental Services Limited, the claims were dismissed on withdrawal except for claims for a protective award. The judgment does not determine the protective award claims and makes no findings on liability or remedy for any remaining claim.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | All claims against the Second and Third Respondents were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimants. All claims against the First Respondent other than claims for a protective award were dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment does not separately list each non-protective-award claim type. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed on withdrawal to the extent this was one of the non-protective-award claims. The judgment does not separately identify the redundancy claim beyond the listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Dismissed on withdrawal to the extent this was one of the non-protective-award claims. The judgment does not separately identify the TUPE claim beyond the listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal to the extent this was one of the non-protective-award claims. The judgment does not separately identify the unfair dismissal claim beyond the listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on withdrawal to the extent this was one of the non-protective-award claims. The judgment does not separately identify the wages claim beyond the listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Dismissed on withdrawal to the extent this was one of the non-protective-award claims. The judgment does not separately identify the working time claim beyond the listing category. |
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.