Case 2202423/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Lopez (Counsel) v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2202423/2019
- Decision date
- 17 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr J Lopez (Counsel)
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Glennie on 6 February 2020. The written judgment records that the claimant was represented by Mr J Lopez and the respondent by Ms S Robertson. No lay members are listed, so this appears to have been a judge-alone hearing.
The tribunal struck out the claim on the grounds that the claimant had not complied with an order of the tribunal and/or that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. The judgment does not identify the substantive causes of action in the extracted text, and it does not record any findings on the merits of the underlying dispute.
The hearing listed for 15 to 17 June 2020 was vacated. The note at the end states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary hearing only. The judgment strikes out 'the claim' for non-compliance with an order of the Tribunal and/or because it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. The extracted text does not specify the underlying substantive claim type(s). | 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.