Case 2201511/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Sayer v Pixelpin Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2201511/2020
- Decision date
- 26 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Sayer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr N Sayer brought a claim against Pixelpin Ltd in the London Central Employment Tribunal. The hearing took place on 25 August 2020 before Employment Judge Quill sitting alone, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by counsel.
The only claim recorded in the written judgment is breach of contract. The tribunal stated that the breach of contract claim failed and was dismissed.
The written record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. No written reasons were provided in the published decision, so the record does not set out the tribunal's factual findings or detailed reasoning beyond the dismissal itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written record states that the claim for breach of contract failed and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, but no written reasons are provided in the published record. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.