Case 2309200/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Paul Andrew Harald Everington v M S Instruments Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2309200/2024
- Decision date
- 29 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Wright Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Paul Andrew Harald Everington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public hearing in London South on 29 September 2025, before Employment Judge D Wright, the tribunal recorded that the claimant's claims against M S Instruments Limited were dismissed upon being withdrawn. The extracted judgment does not set out any substantive findings on liability.
No remedy was awarded, and the judgment does not record any compensatory or other monetary order. It also does not cite any legal test or make findings that turn on the merits of the underlying claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were dismissed upon being withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were dismissed upon being withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were dismissed upon being withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were dismissed upon being withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.