Case 2301902/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Knight Frank LLP and Others — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301902/2024
- Decision date
- 24 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Andrews Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants brought claims including unlawful deductions from wages, unpaid holiday pay, TUPE information and consultation matters, wrongful dismissal and unfair dismissal. They did not attend the preliminary hearing after the start was delayed, and the tribunal considered the respondents' strike-out applications before giving the claimants an opportunity to make written submissions.
The tribunal recorded that the claimants had previously brought claims against the second respondent that were resolved by settlement agreements dated 14 February 2024, followed by judgments dismissing those claims on withdrawal. The agreements recorded that the claimants' employment ended on 13 and 14 November 2023, before the alleged transfer on 15 November 2023, and that they received more than minor compensation sums.
The tribunal accepted the respondents' submissions that continuing the same claims against the second respondent would be an abuse of process. It also concluded that, given the terms of the settlement agreements, allowing the claims to continue against the other respondents would be an abuse of process, and any unspecified post-transfer work would be outside the scope of these claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimants complained of unlawful deductions from wages; the claims were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the claimants complained of unpaid holiday pay; the claims were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The judgment states that the claimants complained of a failure to inform and consult ahead of a TUPE transfer and a failure relating to the election of employee representatives; the claims were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states that the claimants complained of wrongful dismissal; the claims were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimants complained of unfair dismissal; the claims were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- regulation 4 TUPE
- abuse of process
- contractual estoppel
- estoppel by conduct
- settlement in multi-party litigation
- Tamang v Act Security Limited
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.