Case 1405101/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Shrubb and others (see the Schedule of Claimants below) v Wabi-sabi Bay Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1405101/2023
- Decision date
- 31 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Shrubb and others (see the Schedule of Claimants below)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 18 February 2025, the Tribunal gave the Claimants an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued, or to request a hearing. The Claimants did not make any, or any sufficient, written representations in response, and did not request a hearing.
As a result, Employment Judge Livesey ordered that the claim be struck out. The judgment does not contain any merits findings on the underlying claim categories and does not record any award of compensation or other remedy.
The decision was approved on 14 March 2025 and sent to the parties on 31 March 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not distinguish separate merits findings for this cause of action. The entire claim was struck out because the Claimants failed to make sufficient written representations, or request a hearing, after being given that opportunity by letter dated 18 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not distinguish separate merits findings for this cause of action. The entire claim was struck out because the Claimants failed to make sufficient written representations, or request a hearing, after being given that opportunity by letter dated 18 February 2025. | 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.