Case 2213975/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr v Irimia Woven Toyota UK Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2213975/2023
- Decision date
- 5 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held at London Central on 26 March 2024, before Employment Judge A M Snelson sitting alone, with the claimant appearing in person and Mr A Nawbatt KC for the respondent, the tribunal made a strike-out order. The judgment records that the claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
The supplied text does not set out further reasons, findings of fact, or any separate merits determination. No monetary award is recorded, and the judgment was entered in the register and sent to the parties on 5 April 2024.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The extracted judgment says only that 'the claim' was struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success. The case listing identifies breach of contract as one of the pleaded categories, but the judgment does not separate the heads of claim in the supplied text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment says only that 'the claim' was struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success. The case listing identifies unlawful deduction from wages as one of the pleaded categories, but the judgment does not separate the heads of claim in the supplied text. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospect of success
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.