Case 2502391/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr SJ Brooks Mr DS Fitzpatrick v The Common Room of the Great North Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2502391/2019
- Decision date
- 3 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr SJ Brooks Mr DS Fitzpatrick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Newcastle Civil, Family Courts and Tribunals Centre on 17 to 21 October 2022 before Employment Judge Sweeney. The claimants were Mr SJ Brooks and Mr DS Fitzpatrick, and the respondent was The Common Room of the Great North Ltd. Mr Brooks appeared in person and also represented Mr Fitzpatrick; the respondent was represented by employed counsel Mr M Dulovic.
The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal complaints brought by both claimants were not well founded and dismissed them. It also recorded that Mr Brooks's complaints of unauthorised deduction of wages and failure to pay for accrued holiday were dismissed upon withdrawal. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the unfair dismissal complaints by both claimants were not well founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mr Brooks's complaint of unauthorised deduction of wages was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Mr Brooks's complaint of failure to pay for accrued holiday was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.