Case 2400756/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Williams v CarShop — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400756/2024
- Decision date
- 4 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Mr A Williams's claim against CarShop. In a letter dated 21 April 2024, the claimant was asked to respond by 7 May 2024 about the redundancy claim and to explain why it was not reasonably practicable to present the wages claim within the applicable statutory time limit. He did not respond.
A further letter dated 12 June 2024 gave the claimant an opportunity to object to strike out and to make representations by 19 June 2024. As at 4 July 2024, he had not responded to either letter, had not objected to strike out, and had not asked to make representations at a hearing. The Tribunal recorded that the claim had not been actively pursued and therefore struck it out on 4 July 2024. No remedy was awarded or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment refers to the claim being struck out as a whole; the reasons specifically mention the redundancy claim and the claimant's failure to respond to the Tribunal's letters. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to the claim being struck out as a whole; the reasons specifically mention the wages claim and the claimant's failure to explain why it was not reasonably practicable to present it within time. | 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.