Case 2302723/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Wallace v Trinity Financial Limited t/a Trinity Finance — 2019
- Case reference
- 2302723/2018
- Decision date
- 7 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Wallace
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short rule 61 judgment by Employment Judge Ferguson sitting alone at London South on 7 November 2019. The tribunal did not determine any underlying liability claim in the written reasons provided. Instead, it made a costs order arising from the postponement of the hearing on 12 June 2019.
The judgment states that the claimant, Ms K Wallace, shall pay the respondent, Trinity Financial Limited t/a Trinity Finance, £1,165.00 in respect of the respondent's costs incurred by that postponement. No further reasons were set out in the written record, as the judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The written record also states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of service of the decision. On the material available in the extracted text, the only recorded outcome is the claimant's liability for the £1,165 costs order.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This was a costs judgment, not a merits determination of an employment claim. The tribunal ordered the claimant to pay the respondent £1,165 in respect of costs incurred by the postponement of the hearing on 12 June 2019. | Other | — | £1,165 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,165
- across all upheld claims
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.