Case 2302740/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Nikolajev v Dulwich Bazaar Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302740/2020
- Decision date
- 11 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nash Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Nikolajev
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment concerns only the Respondent's application dated 13 June 2021 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 11 June 2021. Employment Judge Nash refused the application on 13 July 2021.
The reasons given were that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. The Tribunal also recorded that the Respondent had failed to comply with the Tribunal's letter of 25 June 2021 and had failed to explain why its response was presented late.
No substantive claim findings or monetary award are set out in this judgment, and the decision does not alter the original judgment of 11 June 2021.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment only records the Respondent's application dated 13 June 2021 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 11 June 2021. The application was refused because there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked, the Respondent failed to comply with the Tribunal's letter of 25 June 2021, and it did not state why the response was presented late. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.