Case 2303602/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Anthony Stone v Bouygues E&S Solutions Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303602/2022
- Decision date
- 23 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Abbott Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Anthony Stone
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal refused the claimant's application to strike out the response or, alternatively, for a deposit order. It found that the respondent's pleaded positions on disputed matters including alleged contractual entitlement to a mobile phone, reasons for dismissal, alleged protected disclosures, and alleged detriments could not be treated as having no reasonable prospect or little reasonable prospect of success on the pleadings.
The Tribunal also refused to strike out the response for non-compliance with orders. It found the identified delays were relatively minor, attributable to the respondent's representative rather than the respondent, and that no concrete prejudice beyond delay had been identified; a fair hearing remained possible and strike-out would be disproportionate.
The judgment records that the claimant had withdrawn his wrongful dismissal claim after the amount understood to relate to one week's notice pay had been paid. No final determination was made on the remaining substantive claims in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment decided the claimant's application to strike out the response, alternatively for a deposit order; the application was refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant withdrew his wrongful dismissal claim at the hearing on 27 November 2022 after the amount understood to relate to notice pay had been paid. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- Rule 37(1) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Rule 37(2) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- White v HC-One Oval Ltd [2022] IRLR 576, EAT
- Rule 2 overriding objective
- Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage [2004] ICR 371, EAT
- Presidential Guidance on General Case Management for England and Wales
- Rule 39(1) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Jansen Van Rensburg v Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames and ors EAT 0096/07
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.