Case 1308363/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Jackson, Counsel For the v Mr A Weiss - Counsel — 2020
- Case reference
- 1308363/2019
- Decision date
- 7 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lloyd Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Jackson, Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing on 3 July 2020 before Employment Judge Lloyd in the linked cases 1308363/2019 and 1304370/2019. The judgment was promulgated in summary form, and the note at the end records that written reasons were requested and would be issued as soon as practicable. The tribunal also noted that the correct title of the respondent is The Secretary of State for Justice.
The tribunal granted the respondent's application to amend its composite grounds of resistance for the two claims and allowed an extension of time. It directed the respondent to present a completed ET3 to both the tribunal and the claimant by 4.00 pm on Friday 10 July 2020.
The claimant's application to strike out the response and for a deposit order in respect of the response was dismissed. In the same judgment, the tribunal exercised its discretion to award the claimant his costs for preparation and attendance at the preliminary hearing on 15 April 2020.
The respondent was ordered to pay £1,804.80 in costs, made up of £1,504.00 for solicitors' and counsel's costs plus £300.80 VAT. A separate case management directions order was to be issued.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment is a summary-form open preliminary hearing and does not determine the substantive claims. It deals with the respondent's amendment/extension application, the claimant's strike-out and deposit applications, and a costs order. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,805
- across all upheld claims
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.