Case 1400609/2019 · Employment Tribunal
1) Ms SM Langdon 2) Mr IP Gatfield v Wincanton Print Company Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1400609/2019
- Decision date
- 1 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
1) Ms SM Langdon 2) Mr IP Gatfield
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment covers case numbers 1400609/2019 and 1401191/2019, with Ms SM Langdon and Mr IP Gatfield listed as claimants against Wincanton Print Company Limited. It is a rule 52 withdrawal judgment dated 1 August 2019.
The tribunal recorded that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimants. It does not record findings on the merits, any remedy, or any substantive legal analysis beyond the withdrawal dismissal by Employment Judge Bax.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The short judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimants. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the judgment itself does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The short judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimants. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the judgment itself does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The short judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimants. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the judgment itself does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.