Case 2413407/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Harrison v Eaton Golf Club Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2413407/2019
- Decision date
- 25 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Harrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a record of a preliminary hearing heard in private via CVP on 10 December 2020 before Judge Brian Doyle. The order states that the hearing concerned time limits only, and that the tribunal permitted the claim to proceed to a final hearing. It also records that the final hearing had already been listed by Employment Judge Horne for 26 and 27 April 2021 at Liverpool.
The document contains case management directions rather than findings on liability. It notes that there were remaining preliminary issues identified by Judge Horne, but that those could be dealt with at the final hearing. The order set dates for a schedule of loss, disclosure, the filing and exchange of witness statements, and preparation of a neutral chronology and key-document list.
No merits decision, liability finding, or remedy was recorded in this judgment. The order does not identify any lay members, and it gives only procedural consequences if the directions are not complied with, including possible strike-out, restriction of participation, or costs under the Employment Tribunal Rules.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | This record is a preliminary hearing on time limits only. The tribunal permitted the claim to proceed to a final hearing and made case management orders, but did not determine the merits of the underlying unfair dismissal claim. | Other | — | — |
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.