Case 1804540/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F J Zaoui v F.Fretwell-Downing Group Limited t/a The Maynard (in liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1804540/2019
- Decision date
- 7 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Little REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F J Zaoui
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr F J Zaoui’s claim against F.Fretwell-Downing Group Limited t/a The Maynard (in liquidation) was listed for 3 August 2020. The claimant did not attend. Mr P Downing, a former director, attended to confirm the respondent’s identity and explained that the company was insolvent and in creditor’s voluntary liquidation. The tribunal noted that the claimant had previously sought adjournments, including because he said he had to attend a meeting in France and later that he would not be back in the UK until 25 March 2020.
The judge recorded that the claim concerned allegedly deducted wages of £120 and possibly holiday pay, but the claimant had not provided documentary proof of whether he was an employee or worker, or any proper explanation for why he said he was entitled to a further £120. The tribunal also noted that on 27 July 2020 the claimant forwarded the only documentary material he had provided, and that it did not explain why he could not attend the 3 August hearing because of a new job.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not actively pursuing the proceedings and, insofar as he was conducting them, was doing so unreasonably. It took into account the repeated adjournment requests, the failure to attend the hearing, and the lack of supporting documentation. The claim was therefore struck out. There were no merits findings and no award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal struck out the case as a whole rather than deciding the merits. It referred to allegedly deducted wages of £120 and said there was no documentary proof of employee or worker status or entitlement. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment also referred to possible holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations, but no separate merits findings were made before the strike out. | 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.