Case 1400899/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr David Nash v Sarsen Energy Ltd. — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400899/2021
- Decision date
- 4 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Le Grys
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr David Nash
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge Le Grys at Bristol by video on 26 and 27 January 2022. The claimant, Mr David Nash, appeared in person and the respondent, Sarsen Energy Ltd, was represented by counsel. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for breach of contract in respect of non-payment of profits was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal stated that it did not have jurisdiction to deal with the remaining breach of contract claims. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.