Case 2410353/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Chesney v R Swain & Sons Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2410353/2019
- Decision date
- 20 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Chesney
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Manchester on 18 March 2020, Employment Judge Batten sitting alone dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim as not well-founded. The tribunal also found that the respondent had not made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages.
The judgment records that the respondent had provided the claimant with written itemised pay statements, so any claim based on the absence of such statements did not succeed. It then states that all other claims were dismissed.
The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record of the decision. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent did not make unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent provided the claimant with written itemised pay statements. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | All other claims were dismissed, but the judgment does not specify them individually. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.