Case 2205210/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Mr Hawkes (Director) REMOTE OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING VIA CLOUD VIDEO PLATFORM — 2020
- Case reference
- 2205210/2019
- Decision date
- 7 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge H Clark Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote open preliminary hearing on 7 October 2020, Employment Judge H Clark considered the Claimant's claims against Capricorn Ventis Limited for race discrimination and unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal did not determine either claim on its merits.
The judgment states that both claims were struck out because the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear them, as they had been presented out of time. No monetary award was made and no remedy issues were decided.
The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in writing within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Struck out at a remote open preliminary hearing because the tribunal found the race discrimination claim was presented out of time and therefore outside its jurisdiction. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out at a remote open preliminary hearing because the tribunal found the claim was presented out of time and therefore outside its jurisdiction. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.