Case 3312254/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T. Barnard v Mechline Developments Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312254/2023
- Decision date
- 27 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr A.
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T. Barnard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote hearing in Norwich on 25 April 2025, Employment Judge Mr A. Spencer dealt with the claimant, Miss T. Barnard, and the respondent, Mechline Developments Limited. The judgment records that the remaining claim was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal therefore did not determine the substantive merits of the remaining claim. The judgment contains no findings on liability beyond the conclusion that the claim failed the strike-out threshold.
The tribunal ordered Miss Barnard to pay the respondent's costs, assessed in the sum of £500.00. The written record notes that the reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The extracted judgment text refers only to "the remaining claim" and does not identify the substantive issue; classification as redundancy pay is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.