Case 3302237/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Gippeswyk Community Educational Trust — 2022
- Case reference
- 3302237/2022
- Decision date
- 7 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records three claimants, Ms D Brame, Ms V Waldron and Ms M Gooding, bringing claims against Gippeswyk Community Educational Trust. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge George Date stated that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment states that the claims succeed. It does not set out the underlying factual findings or identify the individual claim heads in the supplied text. No remedy figure is recorded in the judgment itself, because the amount due to the claimants was left to be determined at a later Remedy Hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The supplied judgment does not identify the individual causes of action. It records only that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, the tribunal proceeded under rule 21, and the claims succeeded with remedy to be determined at a later hearing. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.