Case 2300289/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Smith (deceased) (Continued on behalf of his estate by Mr John Smith) v Jenpro GWER Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300289/2021
- Decision date
- 15 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harrington Appearances
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Smith (deceased) (Continued on behalf of his estate by Mr John Smith)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing heard by CVP on 15 August 2022 before Employment Judge Harrington. The claimant, Mr A Smith, had died and the tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim would proceed by his brother, Mr John Smith, as an appropriate person under section 206 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal did not decide the unfair dismissal claim on its merits. It instead dealt with two applications made in relation to the response: an application to strike out the response to the unfair dismissal claim and an application for a deposit order. Both applications were unsuccessful.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim could proceed by Mr John Smith as the appropriate person under section 206 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It did not determine the merits of the unfair dismissal claim. The applications to strike out the response or for a deposit order were unsuccessful. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 206 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.