Case 2203124/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Bleasdale v Quest Fund Placement Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203124/2019
- Decision date
- 25 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Bleasdale
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Bleasdale's case against Quest Fund Placement Limited was heard at Central London Employment Tribunal on 22 to 24 March 2021 before Employment Judge Norris sitting alone via CVP. The tribunal recorded that the claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel, Mr J Susskind.
The judgment states that the claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages was not well-founded and was dismissed. No separate liability findings, remedy assessment, or monetary award are recorded in the decision.
The record also states that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing, so written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal described this as a claim of constructive unfair dismissal and held that it was not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the unlawful deductions from wages claim was not well-founded. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.