Case 2301493/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Alder, Mr R Alder, Mrs B Anderson, Mr M Atkins, Mr S Barton, Mr J Bibiloni, Mr M Boyd, Miss T Cottrell, Mr M Halford, Mr G Hough, Mr S Medhurst, Mr S Medhurst and Mr P Melham v 1) VM Langfords Ltd 2) Docklands Medical Services Ltd 3) Coperforma Ltd 4) South East Coast Ambulance Service — 2017
- Case reference
- 2301493/2016
- Decision date
- 7 September 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Baron Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Alder, Mr R Alder, Mrs B Anderson, Mr M Atkins, Mr S Barton, Mr J Bibiloni, Mr M Boyd, Miss T Cottrell, Mr M Halford, Mr G Hough, Mr S Medhurst, Mr S Medhurst and Mr P Melham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the Claimants against the Fourth Respondent. It does not set out any factual findings on the merits of the underlying employment claims.
No liability findings, legal tests, or remedy calculations are included in the extract. The decision is procedural only, reflecting the withdrawal and dismissal rather than any adjudication of the substantive claims.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the Claimants against the Fourth Respondent. No substantive merits findings or remedy were recorded in the text provided. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.