Case 1307566/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Brooks v Adrenaline Motorcycles Limited t/a Kestrel Moto — 2020
- Case reference
- 1307566/2019
- Decision date
- 26 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hindmarch Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Brooks
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr B Brooks presented a complaint of unlawful deductions from wages against Adrenaline Motorcycles Limited t/a Kestrel Moto at Birmingham on 26 February 2020. The claimant did not attend the hearing. The respondent's directors attended and produced evidence that the wage claim had been settled in full.
In those circumstances, the tribunal dismissed the unlawful deductions complaint. The written record states that the dismissal followed the claimant's non-attendance and the respondent's evidence of full settlement.
The respondent's counterclaim was also dealt with at the hearing. The tribunal found that it did not have jurisdiction to hear that counterclaim and dismissed it. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint was dismissed on the claimant's non-attendance; the respondent produced evidence that the claim had been settled in full. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the respondent's counterclaim and dismissed it. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.