Case 2604347/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Carlton v FedEx Express UK Transportation Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2604347/2020
- Decision date
- 16 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Swann
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Carlton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis is a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal recorded that the claim succeeds and that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing listed for 4 March 2021. No substantive findings on liability, evidence, or legal reasoning are set out in the extracted text.
The judgment also states that the hearing listed on 16 May 2022 is cancelled. The extracted text does not allocate any monetary award or break the case into separate heads of claim, so no remedy figure is recorded here.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment records that the claim succeeds; the extracted text does not set out separate findings or any award. | Upheld | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Rule 21 judgment records that the claim succeeds; the extracted text does not set out separate findings or any award. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment records that the claim succeeds; the extracted text does not set out separate findings or any award. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment records that the claim succeeds; the extracted text does not set out separate findings or any award. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
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.