Case 1400200/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person (with Court Provider Interpreter Ms Santoro) For the v Mr & Mrs Mead (Mr Mead being the named Respondent) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1400200/2019
- Decision date
- 18 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person (with Court Provider Interpreter Ms Santoro) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short oral judgment issued at the hearing on 18 December 2019 before Employment Judge Gray at Southampton. The parties were Mrs E Florin and Mr C Florin, represented by Mr and Mrs Mead for the Respondent, Mr R Mead t/a Perfect Finish Cleaning Services.
The written record states that Mr C Florin's unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed on withdrawal. It also states that both Claimants' redundancy complaints were dismissed on withdrawal. No merits findings are recorded in the written judgment about the underlying dismissal or redundancy issues.
The Respondent's employer contract counterclaim was likewise dismissed on withdrawal. The note at the end records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so the written record contains only the disposal of the claims and counterclaim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint of Mr C Florin was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | Redundancy complaint by Mrs E Florin dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | Redundancy complaint by Mr C Florin dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Respondent's employer contract counterclaim dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.