Case 3309282/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Steven Marshall Respondent 1: Governing Body of Meadow Vale Primary School Respondent 2: Bracknell Forest Borough Council v Mr Sanjay Prashar (solicitor) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3309282/2022
- Decision date
- 16 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Steven Marshall Respondent 1: Governing Body of Meadow Vale Primary School Respondent 2: Bracknell Forest Borough Council
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing heard by telephone in Watford on 16 March 2023 before Employment Judge Alliott sitting alone. The tribunal recorded that the claimant, Mr Steven Marshall, appeared in person and that the respondent was represented by Mr Sanjay Prashar.
The only substantive finding recorded in the written judgment is that the claims against Mrs Catherine Forrester were dismissed. The tribunal gave two reasons: it had no jurisdiction to hear those claims, and in consequence there was no reasonable prospect of success.
No remedy was awarded in this record of a preliminary hearing, and no other claim outcome is set out in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal dismissed the claims against Mrs Catherine Forrester because there was no jurisdiction to hear them and consequently no reasonable prospect of success. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.