Case 1404382/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Ross v C Sparks & Sons Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1404382/2023
- Decision date
- 23 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Ross
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Mr N Ross's claim. It gave him an opportunity by letter dated 03 April 2024 to make written representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out, because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 01 December 2024 and the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the Tribunal concluded that the claim should be struck out. The hearing fixed for 24 and 25 April 2024 therefore did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not separately address this pleaded category; the claim type is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not separately address this pleaded category; the claim type is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not separately address this pleaded category; the claim type is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not separately address this pleaded category; the claim type is taken from the case listing. | 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.