Case 2416838/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Paul v Verisure Services Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2416838/2018
- Decision date
- 8 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharkett REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Paul
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Manchester on 21 February 2019 before Employment Judge Sharkett. The claimant, Mr E Paul, was represented by Mr Jamal (friend) and the respondent, Verisure Services (UK) Limited, by Mr J French of Counsel.
The judgment records two claims: breach of contract in relation to notice pay, and payment in lieu of holiday accrued but not taken at the date of dismissal. The tribunal did not determine either claim on its merits. Instead, it recorded that both claims were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant.
No monetary award is recorded in the judgment. The tribunal's order is limited to dismissal of the withdrawn claims, and the published text contains no further findings on liability or remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim pleaded as breach of contract (notice pay); the judgment states it was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for payment in lieu of holiday accrued but not taken at the date of dismissal; the judgment states it was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.