Case 1403056/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Lummis v Coopervision Manufacturing Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403056/2019
- Decision date
- 10 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hargrove Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Lummis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered Mr Lummis's claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal against Coopervision Manufacturing Ltd at Southampton on 22 January 2020. By judgment dated 4 February 2020 and sent to the parties on 10 February 2020, Employment Judge Hargrove dismissed both claims under Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success.
The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days. No remedy was awarded because the claims were dismissed at the preliminary stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 37(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 37(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Constitution and Rules of Procedure Regulations 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.