Case 2602202/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Barrow v Two Spotted Dogs Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2602202/2021
- Decision date
- 4 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Swann Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Barrow
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Barrow presented a claim against Two Spotted Dogs Limited in the Midlands East Employment Tribunals on 9 September 2021. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined that judgment could properly be entered under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal stated that the claim succeeds. The extracted judgment does not identify the substantive head or heads of claim in the text provided, so the precise legal basis for the success is not set out here. No liability reasoning beyond the rule 21 default position appears in the extracted text.
The tribunal did not determine remedy in this judgment. Instead, it directed that remedy would be decided at a separate remedy hearing listed for 24 January 2022, with a hearing length of two hours.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not identify the substantive claim type(s). The tribunal dealt with the case under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and held that the claim succeeds. Remedy was left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 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.