Case 1602149/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Cuga Mr D Peters v Topwood Ltd and 2 others — 2021
- Case reference
- 1602149/2020
- Decision date
- 30 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Frazer Representation
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr R Cuga Mr D Peters
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting by CVP before Employment Judge A Frazer on 25 November 2021, dealt with claims brought by Mr R Cuga and Mr D Peters against Topwood Ltd and Delivery Solutions (Delsol) Ltd. The judgment records that Mr Cuga's claim against the First Respondent and Mr Peters' claim against the First and Second Respondent under Regulation 4(9) of the TUPE Regulations 2006 were dismissed under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The same judgment records that Mr Cuga's claim against the First Respondent and Mr Peters' claim against the First and Second Respondent under Regulation 13 TUPE Regulations 2006 were to proceed to a final hearing. No remedy was assessed in this judgment, and no monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Mr Cuga's claim against the First Respondent and Mr Peters' claim against the First and Second Respondent under Regulation 4(9) of the TUPE Regulations 2006 were dismissed under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.