Case 3204561/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K. Christofi v CRG Allied Care Limited and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 3204561/2021
- Decision date
- 17 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms K. Christofi
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a short disposal judgment. It records that the Claimant's claims against the First Respondent, CRG Allied Care Limited, and the Third Respondent, HCRG Homecare Limited, were dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52, Sch.1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
No substantive findings on liability, liability reasoning, or remedy are set out in the extracted text. The judgment does not record any monetary award. The extracted text also does not state the underlying claim categories, and it does not mention any determination as to the Second Respondent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the Claimant's claims against the First Respondent, CRG Allied Care Limited, and the Third Respondent, HCRG Homecare Limited, were dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52, Sch.1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The extracted text does not identify the substantive claim type or any decision concerning the Second Respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52, Sch.1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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.