Case 2404666/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Eileen Moran Mrs Alison Hogg Miss Sarah Moorhouse Mrs Gaynor Davis v GP Strategies Training Limited/LTG Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2404666/2023
- Decision date
- 20 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Eileen Moran Mrs Alison Hogg Miss Sarah Moorhouse Mrs Gaynor Davis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal heard the four claimants' unfair dismissal claims at Manchester on 4 to 6 June 2024 in a remote video hearing, with Employment Judge G Tobin sitting alone. The judgment records that the hearing was by consent and that no face-to-face hearing was required.
The tribunal's decision was that the claimants were not unfairly dismissed by the respondent, GP Strategies Training Limited/LTG Limited, in breach of s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996. The claims were therefore dismissed.
The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No financial award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the four claimants were not unfairly dismissed by the respondent, in breach of s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that the case was dismissed. No separate remedy was awarded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.