Case 2602126/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Priestley v G S Hughes Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2602126/2019
- Decision date
- 3 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Priestley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment. It stated that the claim succeeds, but the extracted text does not specify the substantive cause of action beyond that general conclusion.
The tribunal did not assess compensation at this stage. It ordered that the remedy would be determined at a Remedy Hearing, and that the hearing listed for 30/09/2019 was converted into that Remedy Hearing.
No monetary award is recorded in the judgment text provided, and no split between heads of loss is given. The extracted text also does not identify any lay members or any further factual findings beyond the default judgment outcome.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type in the extracted text; it states only that 'the claim succeeds' and that remedy will be assessed at a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.