Case 2402391/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs J Pomfret First v CRG Clinical Services Limited Second Respondent: Polaris Medical Services Limited — 2023

Case reference: 2402391/2022
Decision date: 27 November 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge M Butler Representation
Venue: Manchester

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs J Pomfret First

Respondent

CRG Clinical Services Limited Second Respondent: Polaris Medical Services Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a video hearing in Manchester on 24 November 2023, Employment Judge M Butler found that there had been a transfer of undertaking between the first and second respondents on 25 August 2023. The claimant's employment transferred to the second respondent, and the second respondent was the claimant's employer when her contract of employment concluded.

On that basis, the claim against the first respondent was dismissed. The judgment does not contain any merits findings on the underlying pay or discrimination issues.

The judge also recorded that, in relation to the equal pay claim against the second respondent, any reference to an equal pay claim for like work had been dismissed on withdrawal. That did not affect the equal pay claim based on work of equal value, which was left unresolved in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The tribunal found that there was a transfer of undertaking between the first and second respondent on 25 August 2023, that the claimant's employment transferred to the second respondent, and that the second respondent was the claimant's employer when her contract of employment concluded.	Dismissed	—	—
Equal pay	In respect of the equal pay claim against the second respondent, any reference to a claim for equal pay for like work was dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment states that this did not affect the equal pay claim being brought on work of equal value, which was not determined in this record.	Withdrawn	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.