Case 2402183/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Rae v Tzar Developments Ltd and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 2402183/2019
- Decision date
- 11 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hoey Dated
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr S Rae
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Mr S Rae brought proceedings against Tzar Developments Ltd and Richmond Lodge and Park Homes Limited (in administration) under case number 2402183/2019. The decision page listed the jurisdiction categories as breach of contract, redundancy, unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages and working time regulations, but the short judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or any findings on the merits.
The tribunal dismissed the proceedings because the claimant withdrew the claims. No liability findings, remedy award, or legal test are recorded in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the short judgment text does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the short judgment text does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the short judgment text does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the short judgment text does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claims by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing context because the short judgment text does not separately describe the pleaded claims. | Withdrawn |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.