Case 1301206/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Tanase v Extra Personnel Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1301206/2019
- Decision date
- 14 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wynn-Evans
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Tanase
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing at Birmingham on 14 October 2019 before Employment Judge Wynn-Evans sitting alone. Mr A Tanase appeared in person and the respondent, Extra Personnel, was represented by Mr Roberts, solicitor. The tribunal dealt with the claimant's breach of contract and direct race discrimination claims at that stage.
Both claims were struck out under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the basis that they had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment does not record any separate liability findings on the merits beyond that strike-out decision.
The record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(a) 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.