Case 2207251/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 2207251/2020
- Decision date
- 16 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing before Employment Judge J S Burns on 1 July 2022. The claimant appeared in person and the first respondent was represented by Ms P Leonard. The tribunal heard the claimant’s applications to strike out the respondents’ defences, the respondents’ applications to strike out the claims, and the claimant’s application to add five further individuals as respondents.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | This judgment was a preliminary hearing only and did not determine the merits of the race discrimination claim. The tribunal dealt with strike-out, jurisdiction, early conciliation and joinder applications, and noted that the repayment dispute appeared to have nothing to do with the claimant’s race. | Other | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | This judgment was a preliminary hearing only and did not determine the merits of the money claim. The tribunal referred to a dispute about whether the claimant should repay £360 out of a larger £760 payment said to relate to a hearing she did not attend. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Rule 16 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 13 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 4(3) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 5 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- s.57 Equality Act 2010
- s.18A Employment Tribunals Act 1996
- E.ON Control Solutions Ltd v Caspall UKEAT/0003/19/JOJ
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.