Case 2602155/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Lobley v Pizza Express (Restaurants) Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2602155/2022
- Decision date
- 7 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Lobley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ahmed, sitting alone at Leicester on 6 March 2023, gave a preliminary-hearing judgment in claims brought by Mr M Lobley against Pizza Express (Restaurants) Ltd. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr Mark Foster, solicitor.
The Tribunal decided that the complaints of equal pay and constructive unfair dismissal were not struck out. It also made no order for a deposit. The judgment records that case management orders for the final hearing were set out separately, so this judgment did not determine the merits of either complaint and did not record any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | At a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal decided the equal pay complaint was not struck out and made no deposit order; the merits were not determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | At a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal decided the constructive unfair dismissal complaint was not struck out and made no deposit order; the merits were not determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.