Case 2400872/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Warwick v Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400872/2022
- Decision date
- 28 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ficklin REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Warwick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 22 September 2022 before Employment Judge Ficklin, the tribunal considered Ms R Warwick's claims against Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Ltd for unfair dismissal and for failure to provide a written statement of reasons for dismissal. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Ms D Taylor, HR executive. The judgment records that part of the hearing took place by remote video platform and that neither party objected to that format.
The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear either claim because both were out of time. No findings were made on the merits of the dismissal or on the alleged failure to provide written reasons for dismissal. The judgment records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because the claim was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim for failure to provide a written statement of reasons for dismissal; the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because the claim was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.