Case 3200682/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A G Diaz Da Corte v Churchill Contract Services — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200682/2024
- Decision date
- 13 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Lewis Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A G Diaz Da Corte
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt East London Hearing Centre by CVP, before Employment Judge C Lewis, the tribunal dealt with the claimant's claims on 12 September 2024 and 13 December 2024. The unfair dismissal claim is recorded as dismissed following withdrawal by the Claimant on 25 June 2024.
The remaining claims were rejected on the merits. The tribunal found that the claim for unlawful deductions from wages was not well-founded and dismissed it, and the claim for failure to provide written employment particulars was also not well-founded and dismissed. No award or remedy is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed following withdrawal by the Claimant on 25 June 2024. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the unlawful deductions from wages claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claim for failure to provide written employment particulars was not well-founded and dismissed; this claim type is not one of the listed taxonomy labels. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.