Case 1801317/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. R Brooks v Moorhead Excavations Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 1801317/2018
- Decision date
- 24 September 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. R Brooks
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Jones ordered the claimant by 14 August 2018 to explain in writing why the claim should not be struck out, to provide his witness statement to the respondent, and to explain how a fair hearing remained possible. The claimant did not respond. On 23 August 2018 he was reminded of those orders and given a further opportunity to comply or explain the non-compliance, but no response was received.
The tribunal found that the claimant was unreasonably conducting the proceedings, was not actively pursuing the claim, and that his failure to comply with the orders meant a fair hearing was no longer possible. In those circumstances, the claim was struck out by Employment Judge Rogerson on 24 September 2018. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that 'the claim' was struck out and does not separate individual causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that 'the claim' was struck out and does not separate individual causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.