Case 2503541/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Daglish v Lakemere Global Holdings Ltd t/a AGO Outsourcing (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2503541/2019
- Decision date
- 9 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Daglish
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a strike out judgment under rule 37 concerning case numbers 2503541/2019, 2503557/2019 and 2503566/2019 against Lakemere Global Holdings Ltd T/A AGO Outsourcing. The tribunal said the claims were duplicate claims.
By letter dated 20 December 2019, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations as to why the claims should not be struck out. The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, in response. The tribunal therefore struck out the claims.
The judgment also records that the claimant’s earlier claim, 2503504/2019, proceeds and is not affected by this judgment. No remedy or monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | One of the duplicate claims struck out under rule 37. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive complaint for this case number. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | One of the duplicate claims struck out under rule 37. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive complaint for this case number. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | One of the duplicate claims struck out under rule 37. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive complaint for this case number. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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.