Case 2501882/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Smith v Newcastle Park & Fly Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2501882/2020
- Decision date
- 21 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claimant's unfair dismissal claim by video on 14 to 15 April 2021 before Employment Judge Aspden. The written record identifies only that the claimant, Mr N Smith, brought a claim against Newcastle Park & Fly Limited and that the hearing was remote with no objection from the parties.
The judgment records a single substantive outcome: the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was not made out and was dismissed. No separate factual findings, legal reasoning, or remedy assessment are set out in the written record provided.
The note to the judgment states that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. On the material available here, there is no monetary award and no indication of any additional claims.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states only that the claimant's claim of unfair dismissal was not made out and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were provided in the record. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.