Case 2601315/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Mr L Ramos v Nottinghamshire Women’s Aid Limited and 1 other — 2022

Case reference: 2601315/2021
Decision date: 28 September 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Welch

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr L Ramos

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This judgment is on a reconsideration application, not a substantive liability decision. The claimant applied for reconsideration of the earlier judgment dated 10 March 2022, specifically seeking anonymisation of his middle name to the letter "G". The application was received by Employment Judge Welch on 16 September 2022 and was refused.

The judge said there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. The reasons record that the claimant had previously made an application on 7 July 2022 for anonymisation of his middle name, that request had already been refused with reasons given, and the later application dated 22 July 2022 provided no further grounds to change that decision.

The judge also concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to anonymise the claimant's middle name in the judgment. The reconsideration request was therefore refused.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Application for reconsideration of the judgment dated 10 March 2022, seeking anonymisation of the claimant's middle name, was refused by Employment Judge Welch on 28 September 2022.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.