Case 1403216/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S George v Brandon Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 1403216/2022
- Decision date
- 14 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S George
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary issues hearing in Bristol on 28 July 2023 before Employment Judge Midgley, the tribunal dealt with two claims brought by Mr S George against The Brandon Trust. The judgment records that the unlawful deduction of wages claim was struck out as an abuse of process on the grounds of cause of action estoppel.
The tribunal also struck out the claim for failure to inform and consult contrary to Regulation 13 of TUPE 2006. The stated reasons were that the claim had been presented out of time and that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear it. The judgment was issued orally at the hearing and recorded in writing on 14 August 2023.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out as an abuse of process on the grounds of cause of action estoppel. | Struck out | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Claim for failure to inform and consult contrary to Regulation 13 TUPE 2006 was struck out because it was presented out of time and the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- cause of action estoppel
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.