Case 1600286/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Pajimolin v Voltcom Construction Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1600286/2021
- Decision date
- 22 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Pajimolin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 3 November 2021, the tribunal gave Mr R Pajimolin an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, explaining why his claim against Voltcom Construction Ltd should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment records that he did not make written representations, did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
Employment Judge Sharp therefore struck out the claim on 22 November 2021. The decision contains no substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claim(s) and records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment states only that 'the claim' was struck out because it had not been actively pursued; the underlying head of claim is taken from the case context/listing rather than being itemised in the text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment states only that 'the claim' was struck out because it had not been actively pursued; the underlying head of claim is taken from the case context/listing rather than being itemised in the text. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.