Case 1305209/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Shenton v George Birchall Services Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305209/2020
- Decision date
- 3 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woffenden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Shenton
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment concerns a complaint for a Protective Award brought by Mr J Shenton against George Birchall Services Limited (in voluntary liquidation). The tribunal notes that, by an order made on 21 January 2021 by Employment Judge Woffenden, the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why the complaint should not be struck out because it appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal held that the complaint of Protective Award should be struck out. The judgment records no substantive determination of the merits of the underlying claim and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment describes the claim as a 'Protective Award' complaint and strikes it out because the claimant did not make sufficient representations, or request a hearing, after an earlier order of 21 January 2021 gave him the opportunity to do so. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.