Case 1803534/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Hall v Treymaine Limited t/a Chiltern Mills AT A HEARING — 2019
- Case reference
- 1803534/2019
- Decision date
- 19 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Hull
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Hall
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Hull on 18 December 2019 before Employment Judge Lancaster. The claimant, Mrs P Hall, did not attend. The respondent, Treymaine Limited t/a Chiltern Mills, was represented by Mr J Gilbert, consultant.
The extracted judgment records only that, pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, the claim was dismissed. No factual findings on the merits, liability findings, or remedy assessment are set out in the text provided.
The judgment does not specify the individual pleaded complaints in the extracted text, so the outcome can only be recorded at the level of dismissal of the claim as presented. No monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause(s) of action in the extracted text. It states only that, pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the claim was dismissed after the claimant did not attend. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.