Case 3315409/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Lambert v Hertfordshire County Council — 2024
- Case reference
- 3315409/2022
- Decision date
- 2 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bansal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Lambert
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short judgment on the claimant's application for amendment in case 3315409/2022. Employment Judge Bansal, sitting alone at Watford on 20 October 2023, allowed the application only so far as it related to complaints of unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages.
The record does not contain a substantive liability decision on those complaints. It records only that the amendment was permitted for those two complaints, and does not state any findings on the underlying facts, any remedy, or any dismissal of other claims.
The judgment also records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's note. The written record was sent to the parties on 2 April 2024.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal granted the claimant's application for amendment only in respect of complaints of unfair dismissal; this short record does not determine the substantive merits of that complaint. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal granted the claimant's application for amendment only in respect of complaints of unlawful deductions from wages; this short record does not determine the substantive merits of that complaint. | Other | — | — |
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.