Case 2600109/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Farmer and others (as per attached schedule) v Hinckley Carer Support Scheme and others — 2019
- Case reference
- 2600109/2019
- Decision date
- 30 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed
- Venue
- Leicester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Farmer and others (as per attached schedule)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leicester on 1 July 2019, Employment Judge Ahmed sitting alone entered a Rule 21 judgment in favour of all claimants listed in the attached schedule. The judgment records that all of those claimants succeeded in their claims against the respondents.
The body of the extracted decision does not identify the individual legal causes of action or distinguish separate findings by claim type. It also does not make any monetary award. Instead, the tribunal said that remedy would be determined after receipt of schedules of loss, or at a remedy hearing to be fixed if necessary.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the underlying cause(s) of action; it records only that all claimants in the attached schedule succeeded in their claims under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.