Case 2400398/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Taylor v Moo Media Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400398/2022
- Decision date
- 7 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Taylor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 10 October 2022, the tribunal asked the claimant or his personal representatives to confirm whether the claims were being pursued, as it had not been able to ascertain the claimant’s circumstances. No communication was received from the claimant after that letter.
The tribunal recorded that the letter was not returned as undelivered and that the email sent by the tribunal was not replied to. In those circumstances, the tribunal concluded that it appeared the claims were not being pursued and ordered that they be struck out.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal struck out the claim(s) after no communication was received from the claimant following a letter dated 10 October 2022 asking whether the claims were being pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the claim(s) after no communication was received from the claimant following a letter dated 10 October 2022 asking whether the claims were being pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal struck out the claim(s) after no communication was received from the claimant following a letter dated 10 October 2022 asking whether the claims were being pursued. | 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.