Case 2500610/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Little v G O'Brien & Sons(nationwide Demolition Contractors) Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2500610/2019
- Decision date
- 9 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Little
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr B Little presented a claim of unfair dismissal against G. O’Brien & Sons (Nationwide Demolition Contractors) Limited. The tribunal recorded that notice of the claim was sent to the respondent on 8 April 2019 and that no response had been presented.
Applying Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, Employment Judge Shepherd found that the time for presenting a response had expired and that no valid response had been presented. On that basis, the unfair dismissal claim succeeded.
The judgment did not determine remedy. It directed that the hearing listed for 29 July 2019 be converted to a Remedy Hearing at the same time and venue, with an estimated length of three hours.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent presented no response, so the unfair dismissal claim succeeded. Remedy was left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.