Case 1400942/2015 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Twenty-Four Seven Recruitment Services Ltd and others — 2020
- Case reference
- 1400942/2015
- Decision date
- 24 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 11 September 2020, the tribunal told the claimants that it was considering striking out the claims because they had not been actively pursued. They were given an opportunity to make written representations or to request a hearing explaining why that step should not be taken.
The claimants did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claims. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim type(s).
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim type. In case 1400942/2015, the tribunal struck out the claim because it had not been actively pursued and the claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim type. In joined case 1400986/2015, the tribunal struck out the claim because it had not been actively pursued and the claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.