Case 2600436/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Rimmer v Loram UK Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2600436/2021
- Decision date
- 3 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Representation
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Rimmer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Nottingham on 1 July 2021 before Employment Judge Britton, the claimant applied to amend his case in two respects: to introduce a new claim for outstanding holiday pay, and to rely on events before 18 September 2020 as a cause of action. The tribunal refused both applications.
This judgment is a short written record of the decision only. It notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent. The record also states that directions accompanied the judgment.
No substantive merits decision on the underlying unfair dismissal or public interest disclosure claim is recorded in this document, and no monetary award is set out.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Application to amend the claim to introduce a new claim for outstanding holiday pay was refused. The judgment records no substantive merits determination on holiday pay. | Other | — | — |
| Other | Application to amend the existing claim so as to rely on events prior to 18 September 2020 as a cause of action was refused. The written record does not identify the underlying substantive cause of action. | 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.