Case 2401014/2025 · Employment Tribunal
W Poole v Lewis Reed (WAV) Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401014/2025
- Decision date
- 23 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
W Poole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity, by a letter dated 23 September 2025, to make representations or request a hearing about why the claim should not be struck out. The Tribunal recorded that it appeared a fair hearing was no longer possible because the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The Tribunal concluded that a fair hearing was not possible and struck out the claim; the hearing listed for 11 and 12 June 2026 was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The short judgment states that the claim is struck out because a fair hearing was no longer possible and the claim had not been actively pursued. It does not separately address this claim type beyond the listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The short judgment states that the claim is struck out because a fair hearing was no longer possible and the claim had not been actively pursued. It does not separately address this claim type beyond the listing category. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.