Case 2301819/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jonathan Hayes v Uswitch Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301819/2022
- Decision date
- 21 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jonathan Hayes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote hearing in London South on 21 April 2023, Employment Judge B Smith sat alone. The claimant, Mr Jonathan Hayes, appeared in person and the respondent, Uswitch Ltd, was represented by counsel, Anthony Johnson.
The only recorded decision is that the claimant's application to amend his claim was refused. The proposed amendment would have added unfair dismissal, described in the judgment as constructive dismissal, together with other matters raised in his email dated 13 October 2022 and in the claimant's agenda for the hearing.
The judgment does not set out substantive findings on the merits of any underlying dismissal or wages claim, and it records that reasons were given orally at the hearing. It also states that written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend his claim to include unfair dismissal (constructive dismissal) and other matters raised in his email dated 13 October 2022 and his agenda for the hearing. The judgment records no substantive merits determination on those claims. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.