Case 2502844/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Fake v Glass House Leisure Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2502844/2019
- Decision date
- 4 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A.M.S.Green Representation
- Venue
- North Shields
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Fake
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in North Shields on 4 December 2019, Employment Judge A.M.S. Green recorded that the claimant, Mr R Fake, appeared in person and that the respondent, Glass House Leisure Ltd, was not present or represented. The tribunal's judgment was that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claims.
The written record does not set out any substantive findings on the merits or identify the factual basis for the jurisdiction decision. It also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days; no monetary award or other remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment only states that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear these claims. The underlying head of claim is not separately analysed in the text; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written judgment only states that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear these claims. The underlying head of claim is not separately analysed in the text; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | 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.