Case 1306314/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Robbins v PD Employees Ltd Heard: Birmingham by CVP — 2023
- Case reference
- 1306314/2020
- Decision date
- 12 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Codd Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Robbins
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 12 January 2023 before Employment Judge Codd, the tribunal amended the respondent’s name to PD Employees Ltd. The case was heard by CVP in Birmingham, with Mr Robbins appearing for himself and Mr Cheetham of counsel for the respondent.
The tribunal struck out the claimant’s unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims under Rule 37(a), (b) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The recorded reasons were that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success, the litigation had been conducted in an unreasonable or vexatious manner, and the claims had not been actively pursued.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 37(a), (b) and (d) on the basis that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success, the litigation had been conducted in an unreasonable or vexatious manner, and it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Struck out under Rule 37(a), (b) and (d) on the same grounds as the unfair dismissal claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(a), (b) and (d) 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.