Case 2410409/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Ruppert v Alan Roper & Sons Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2410409/2019
- Decision date
- 20 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Ruppert
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Carlisle on 1 November 2019 before Employment Judge Ainscough sitting alone. The claimant, Mr K Ruppert, was not in attendance; the respondent, Alan Roper & Sons Ltd, was represented by Mr A Roper.
The only claim identified in the judgment was a claim for failure to pay a redundancy payment in accordance with section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal struck out that claim because it had not been actively pursued, applying Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal recorded that reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written record also notes that written reasons would not be provided unless a request had been made at the hearing or was made in writing within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Claim for failure to pay a redundancy payment under section 135 ERA 1996. Struck out because it had not been actively pursued, under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.