Case 2601637/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Valauskas First v Hire Power Contracts Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation) Second Respondent: Starglaze Windows and Conservatories Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601637/2019
- Decision date
- 24 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Britton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Valauskas First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 24 September 2019, Employment Judge P Britton issued a Rule 21 judgment in favour of the claimant, Mr E Valauskas, against the first respondent, Hire Power Contracts Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation). The judgment does not set out the underlying causes of action in the extracted text, but it records that the claim succeeds against the first respondent.
The judgment states that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled would be determined after determination of liability as to the second respondent, Starglaze Windows and Conservatories Ltd. It also records that the hearing listed for 6 November 2019 was cancelled and that the matter remained listed for hearing on 2, 4 and 5 March 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Rule 21 judgment. The extracted text does not identify the underlying claim types, but records that the claim succeeds against the first respondent. Remedy was left to be determined after determination of liability as to the second respondent. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.