Case 2602426/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S A Rose v Dual Care Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2602426/2022
- Decision date
- 19 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S A Rose
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands East Employment Tribunals on 25 October 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 records that the claim succeeds and that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. The extracted text does not contain any further findings on liability, does not break down the success by head of claim, and does not quantify any award in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The extracted judgment text records only that the claim succeeds under rule 21; it does not set out separate substantive reasoning in the passage provided. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment text records only that the claim succeeds under rule 21; it does not set out separate substantive reasoning in the passage provided. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.