Case 2411920/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Jones v Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust — 2019
- Case reference
- 2411920/2018
- Decision date
- 3 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buzzard REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Buzzard at Liverpool on 29 March 2019, the Tribunal recorded that Mrs E Jones's claims of discrimination against Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust were all dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. The written judgment does not identify the protected characteristic or set out separate findings on any discrimination allegation.
The Tribunal also considered the respondent's application for costs in relation to this hearing and the preliminary hearing convened on 29 November 2018 before Employment Judge Ryan. The application was made under rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, but the Tribunal held that it was not well-founded and dismissed it.
No monetary award or remedy was recorded. The judgment states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the claimant's claims of discrimination were all dismissed on withdrawal, but the extracted judgment text does not identify the protected characteristic or specify the discrimination cause of action. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The respondent's application for costs under rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 was dismissed as not well-founded. This was not a claimant employment claim, so it is classified as other. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.