Case 1600927/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Davies v 1) Quinn Radiators Limited (In Administration) 2) Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600927/2019
- Decision date
- 24 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Davies
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 2 August 2022, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that the claimant had not complied with the tribunal’s order sent by email on 14 March 2022 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. As a result, the tribunal struck out the complaints of breach of contract, redundancy pay, unfair dismissal and unpaid wages. The judgment records no substantive findings on the merits of the claims and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to 'unpaid wages'; this has been mapped to unlawful deduction from wages. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.