Case 3320813/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Anderson, counsel For the v Ms. Mould, solicitor. — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320813/2019
- Decision date
- 23 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heal Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Anderson, counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a telephone preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Heal on 23 March 2020. The judgment records that the claimant, Ms C Marshall, was represented by Ms C Anderson and the respondents, In Health Ltd and Fiona Rooney, were represented by Ms Mould.
The only substantive decision recorded is that the claimant was given permission to amend her claim in the terms set out in the Case Management Summary of the same date. The tribunal stated that it had considered time limits, but it made no final determination on limitation at this hearing.
No final findings were made on liability, no claim-specific remedies were awarded, and the written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and would not be provided unless requested under the tribunal's standard procedure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Telephone preliminary hearing only. The tribunal granted the claimant permission to amend her claim, but did not make any final determination about time limits or decide the underlying claims. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.