Case 2401341/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Cook v Disclosure and Barring Service — 2024
- Case reference
- 2401341/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Dunlop on 12 September 2024. The respondent applied to strike out the claimant's complaint of automatic unfair dismissal on the grounds of taking family leave. That application was refused.
The respondent also applied, in the alternative, for deposit orders in relation to the family-leave dismissal complaint and the claimant's ordinary unfair dismissal claim. That alternative application was also refused. The written record does not set out substantive merits findings or any remedy, and it notes only that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parental leave | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent's application to strike out the claimant's complaint of automatic unfair dismissal on the grounds of taking family leave was refused; the merits of the claim were not determined in the written record. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent's alternative application for a deposit order in relation to the claimant's ordinary unfair dismissal claim was refused; the merits of the claim were not determined in the written record. | Other | — | — |
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.