Case 2414826/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D McCallum v Dcs Recruitment — 2022
- Case reference
- 2414826/2021
- Decision date
- 26 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Newstead Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D McCallum
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNeither party attended the hearing listed for 15 September 2022. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had confirmed, in the ET3, in correspondence dated 6-8 and 25 April 2022 and 15 September 2022, and by telephone on 15 September 2022, that the sums claimed by the claimant had been paid in full twice.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant told the tribunal clerk by telephone on 15 September 2022 that the claim was 'quashed' and that he was unaware of the hearing. When asked whether he had been paid in full, the line disconnected and the claimant did not answer two further calls.
On that basis, the tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim for unpaid wages and consequential expenses in accordance with Schedule 1, Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal described the claim as one for unpaid wages and consequential expenses. It dismissed the claim after recording that the respondent said the sums claimed had been paid in full twice and the claimant said the claim was 'quashed'. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.