Case 1601573/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Blackmore v DM Jones Electrical Contractors Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1601573/2019
- Decision date
- 8 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
- Venue
- Remotely
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Blackmore
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing on 5 April 2022, before Employment Judge Russell and held remotely by video from Cardiff, did not determine the merits of the claim. By consent, the tribunal adjourned the hearing so the parties could implement the agreed terms of settlement.
The judgment stated that either party could apply to restore the case for a further hearing if the settlement was not carried through. It also stated that if no such application was received by 25 April 2022, the claim would stand dismissed. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | By consent, the hearing was adjourned to allow the parties to implement agreed terms of settlement. The judgment recorded that either party could apply to restore the case for further hearing in default, and that if no such application was received by 25 April 2022 the claim would stand dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent, the hearing was adjourned to allow the parties to implement agreed terms of settlement. The judgment recorded that either party could apply to restore the case for further hearing in default, and that if no such application was received by 25 April 2022 the claim would stand dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
| Breach of contract | By consent, the hearing was adjourned to allow the parties to implement agreed terms of settlement. The judgment recorded that either party could apply to restore the case for further hearing in default, and that if no such application was received by 25 April 2022 the claim would stand dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
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.