Case 2600967/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Creasey v The Grovecare (UK) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600967/2022
- Decision date
- 26 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Creasey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands East Region of the Employment Tribunals on 6 April 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment states that the claim succeeds. The extracted text does not identify the substantive legal basis of the claim, and it does not record any findings on liability beyond the rule 21 default judgment procedure.
The tribunal did not assess remedy in this judgment. It recorded that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled would be determined at a Remedy Hearing on a date to be fixed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the underlying cause of action in the extracted text. It records that the claim succeeds under rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and that remedy would be determined at a later Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.