Case 1309024/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr T Goldup, Employment Law Consultant — 2020
- Case reference
- 1309024/2019
- Decision date
- 17 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was held remotely by video on 17 November 2020 before Employment Judge Dimbylow. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr T Goldup, Employment Law Consultant. The judgment concerned claims about mileage expenses, unpaid wages and commission, and holiday pay.
The tribunal dismissed the breach of contract claim for damages over mileage expenses. Its reason was jurisdictional: the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear that claim because the claimant was still an employee of the respondent.
The tribunal also dismissed the claims for unlawful deduction from wages and failure to pay commission for the period from August 2019 to December 2019. It declared those claims were not well-founded. A further claim for failure to pay for holidays in August 2019 was likewise found not well-founded and dismissed.
No monetary award was made. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days, and no such request was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The claim was for damages for breach of contract over mileage expenses. The tribunal dismissed it because it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim while the claimant remained an employee of the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claims for unlawful deduction from wages and failure to pay commission for the period August 2019 to December 2019 were not well-founded and dismissed them. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for failure to pay for holidays in August 2019 was found not well-founded and dismissed. | 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.