Case 1400160/2021 · Employment Tribunal
1400160/2021 Mr Matthew Smith 1400237/2021 Mr Oliver Simmons 1400651/2021 Mr Michal Tereszkiewicz 1402976/2021 Mr Karol Prus 1402981/2021 Mr Nicholas Rogers v Princess Yachts Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1400160/2021
- Decision date
- 22 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pirani Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
1400160/2021 Mr Matthew Smith 1400237/2021 Mr Oliver Simmons 1400651/2021 Mr Michal Tereszkiewicz 1402976/2021 Mr Karol Prus 1402981/2021 Mr Nicholas Rogers
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claims brought by Mr Matthew Smith, Mr Oliver Simmons, Mr Michal Tereszkiewicz, Mr Karol Prus and Mr Nicholas Rogers against Princess Yachts Limited. The reason given was that, by a letter dated 7 February 2024, the tribunal had invited the claimants to make representations or request a hearing on why the claims should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued.
The judgment records that the claimants failed to make written representations, or failed to make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claims. The judgment does not record any merits findings or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers collectively to 'the above claims' and does not distinguish a separate outcome for this claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers collectively to 'the above claims' and does not distinguish a separate outcome for this claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
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.