Case 2600670/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Lovell v Quantum Communications Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2600670/2024
- Decision date
- 23 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Swann Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Lovell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a Rule 21 default judgment. It records that the claim was issued in the Midlands East Employment Tribunals on 2 May 2024 and that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. On that basis, the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment states that the claim succeeds. It does not, in the extracted text provided, identify the individual heads of claim or set out substantive findings on liability beyond the Rule 21 default procedure. The hearing listed for the hearing date was cancelled.
Remedy was not determined in the judgment. The judge directed that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing for one day on a date to be fixed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment text does not identify the individual causes of action; it records only that the claim succeeds under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.