Case 3200281/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R O’6hea v Twitter UK Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200281/2023
- Decision date
- 24 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Codd Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R O’6hea
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a record of a preliminary hearing heard by Employment Judge A Codd on 24 July 2023 at East London Hearing Centre by telephone. The claimant was represented by Mr Bell, solicitor, and the respondent by Mr Bhatt, counsel.
The only recorded judgment was that the respondent's application for strike out of the unfair dismissal and sex discrimination claims failed and was dismissed. The tribunal did not decide the substantive merits of either claim in this record.
No remedy was recorded, and the hearing outcome left the unfair dismissal and sex discrimination claims in place for further determination.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | At the preliminary hearing, the respondent's application to strike out this claim failed and was dismissed; the underlying unfair dismissal claim was not determined on the merits. | Other | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | At the preliminary hearing, the respondent's application to strike out this claim failed and was dismissed; the underlying sex discrimination claim was not determined on the merits. | Other | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.