Case 2304670/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Aze-Kaka v Divine Motions Healthcare Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2304670/2020
- Decision date
- 22 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Aze-Kaka
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment covers case numbers 2304670/2020 and 2304671/2020. By letter dated 25 February 2022, the tribunal gave Mr T Aze-Kaka an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The tribunal said the concern was that he had not answered the correspondence sent on 12 July 2021 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
Mr Aze-Kaka did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. Employment Judge Wright therefore struck out the claim. The judgment was dated 8 March 2022 and sent to the parties on 22 March 2022.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The short judgment does not identify the substantive cause of action; this classification is taken from the linked GOV.UK listing for case nos. 2304670/2020 and 2304671/2020. The judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The short judgment does not identify the substantive cause of action; this classification is taken from the linked GOV.UK listing for case nos. 2304670/2020 and 2304671/2020. The judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
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.