Case 2401376/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Horner v Kendal Nutricare Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2401376/2022
- Decision date
- 28 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ganner REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Horner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a costs judgment heard at Liverpool by CVP on 18 July 2022 before Employment Judge Ganner. The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, with the written record sent to the parties on 28 July 2022. The claimant was represented by Miss K Boyle, counsel, and the respondent by Mrs J McKay from HR.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant's legal costs of the ineffective hearing of 18 and 19 July 2022 forthwith. The order was limited to counsel's fees only, quantified at £2,800 plus 20% VAT, making £3,360 payable.
The judgment does not determine the underlying unfair dismissal or breach of contract claims listed in the case. It notes instead that the resumed final hearing was listed for 20 and 21 September 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Costs judgment only. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant's legal costs of the ineffective hearing of 18/19 July 2022, limited to counsel's fees, being £2,800 plus 20% VAT. | Upheld | — | £3,360 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,360
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.