Case 2401576/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Afsar v Co-operative Legal Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2401576/2023
- Decision date
- 19 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Afsar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the claimant's application dated 30 June 2023 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 19 June 2023. Employment Judge Ainscough Date refused the application under rule 72, finding there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.
The reasons given were limited to the reconsideration issue. The judge referred to paragraph [6] of the original decision and said that the respondent had provided evidence that the claimant had been given sufficient notice in accordance with her contract of employment, and that this point had more than little reasonable prospect of success. The judgment does not restate the substantive claims or any monetary remedy from the original decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment is only on the claimant's application dated 30 June 2023 for reconsideration of the judgment sent on 19 June 2023. The substantive claim decided in the original judgment is not stated in this text, so it is not separately extracted here. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 72
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.