Case 1802022/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr FE McElrue v David Jenkins Meats Retail Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1802022/2019
- Decision date
- 10 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr FE McElrue
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 52 judgment dated 10 October 2019. Employment Judge Shepherd recorded that the proceedings were dismissed because the claimant withdrew the claim. The judgment does not contain any findings on liability, any hearing of the merits, or any monetary award.
The gov.uk listing for the case identifies breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages as the claim categories, but the judgment itself does not break the withdrawal down by claim or give any substantive reasoning on those issues. The only recorded disposition is dismissal of the proceedings following withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records only that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant; it gives no separate merits findings or award. Claim type taken from the gov.uk listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records only that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant; it gives no separate merits findings or award. Claim type taken from the gov.uk listing category. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.