Case 2502351/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Henderson v Pacifica Appliance Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502351/2023
- Decision date
- 17 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Langridge Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Henderson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs A Henderson’s claim for unfair dismissal against Pacifica Appliance Services Limited was upheld. The judgment, given orally at the hearing and recorded in writing on 17 April 2024, states in terms that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The hearing took place at Newcastle upon Tyne Hearing Centre via CVP on 16-17 April 2024, with Mrs Henderson appearing in person and the respondent represented by Mrs V Weston, Group HR Director.
No written reasons were provided in this record, and the tribunal did not set out the factual findings or legal analysis beyond the liability outcome. Compensation was not determined at this stage. The tribunal directed that a separate remedy hearing would take place by CVP on 23 May 2024 to determine compensation.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that Mrs A Henderson was unfairly dismissed by Pacifica Appliance Services Limited. The judgment recorded that a separate remedy hearing would be held on 23 May 2024 to determine compensation, so no monetary award was fixed in this decision. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.