Case 1309283/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Lee v Needham Laser Technologies Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1309283/2019
- Decision date
- 22 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Lee
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 22 May 2020, Employment Judge Broughton issued a judgment under rule 52 in the case of Mr K Lee v Needham Laser Technologies Ltd. The judgment records that, subject to an outstanding request for a Preparation Time Order, the liability elements of the claimant's claims were dismissed upon withdrawal.
The tribunal did not determine the merits of the underlying claims. Instead, it treated the claims as withdrawn and vacated the hearing date. The judgment does not identify the substantive cause or causes of action beyond referring generally to the claimant's claims.
The tribunal directed the claimant to make a formal application for a Preparation Time Order within 14 days, specifying precisely what is claimed and why. The respondent was given 14 further days to respond, and the costs matter was listed for three hours before an employment judge on the first available date after 1 September 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the substantive type of claim; it states that the liability elements of the claimant's claims are dismissed upon withdrawal, subject to an outstanding request for a Preparation Time Order. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52
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.