Case 1306649/2020 · Employment Tribunal
not in attendance For the v Mrs J Gronning, director — 2022
- Case reference
- 1306649/2020
- Decision date
- 11 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
not in attendance For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge Dean sitting alone at Birmingham by CVP on 11 January 2022. The claimant was not in attendance. The respondent was represented by Mrs J Gronning, director of Heart of England Farms Ltd.
The written judgment records that the claimant had failed to actively pursue his complaints before the tribunal. On that basis, the tribunal dismissed the claimant’s complaints. The judgment does not set out any substantive determination on the underlying merits in the written reasons, because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal therefore made no award of compensation or other remedy. No split between individual heads of claim is recorded in the written judgment, and no monetary figure is stated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed after the tribunal found the claimant had failed to actively pursue his complaints; no substantive findings on the merits are recorded in the written judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Dismissed after the tribunal found the claimant had failed to actively pursue his complaints; no substantive findings on the merits are recorded in the written judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.