Case 1805874/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Yaqub v Power EC Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805874/2021
- Decision date
- 22 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rogerson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Yaqub
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 15 May 2023, the Tribunal gave Mr S Yaqub an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing explaining why the claim should not be struck out. The reasons identified were that he had not complied with the Tribunal’s order of 15 May 2023 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
Mr Yaqub did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the claim. The judgment records no substantive findings on liability and no remedy assessment, because the proceedings ended at the strike-out stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claim was struck out. The extracted text does not separately list the pleaded claims, but the GOV.UK listing for this case categorises it as redundancy and unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim was struck out. The extracted text does not separately list the pleaded claims, but the GOV.UK listing for this case categorises it as redundancy and unfair dismissal. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.