Case 2602173/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs G Ragsdell v Loughborough University — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602173/2019
- Decision date
- 31 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs G Ragsdell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment by Employment Judge Victoria Butler sitting alone at Nottingham on 13 March 2020. The decision recorded two applications arising from the Claimant's attempt to rely on events at a meeting on 9 January 2019 as 'the last straw'. The Claimant's application to amend the claim to include those events was allowed.
The Respondent's application that the Claimant should be ordered to pay a deposit as a condition of continuing to rely on the last straw was refused. The judgment does not determine the substantive unfair dismissal claim or record any monetary award. It is a procedural decision only, and the written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The Claimant's application to amend the claim to rely on events at a meeting on 9 January 2019 described as 'the last straw' was allowed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The Respondent's application for an order that the Claimant pay a deposit as a condition of continuing to rely on the last straw was refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.