Case 2407433/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Gabay v Paperchase Products Limited (in administration) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2407433/2021
- Decision date
- 5 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Gabay
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal reconsidered a rule 21 judgment dated 29 June 2022 following an application made by letter dated 18 July 2022. It revoked that judgment because the claim had not been served on the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, who was entitled under rule 96 to appear and be heard in proceedings that may involve a payment out of the National Insurance Fund.
The tribunal found that, because of the failure to serve the Secretary of State, rule 21 did not apply. It directed that the claim form, correspondence, revoked judgment, reconsideration application and written submissions be served on the Secretary of State, who was given 28 days to respond. Employment Judge Ainscough also recused herself from the final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment is a reconsideration decision revoking a previous rule 21 judgment because the claim had not been served on the Secretary of State. The underlying claim is not adjudicated in this text. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 21
- rule 70
- rule 71
- rule 96
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.