Case 3200856/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Smith v OSR Recruitment Services Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200856/2019
- Decision date
- 25 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the respondent’s name was amended from OSR Ltd to OSR Recruitment Services Limited. It stated that the claim concerned a possible transfer of undertakings between the respondent and Randstad Solutions Limited on 6 January 2019, together with claims for accrued holiday pay and unpaid wages before 7 January 2019.
The judgment states that the claimant settled those claims, as well as related claims against Randstad Solutions Limited, by way of COT3. It further records that the claimant withdrew the claims by correspondence to the tribunal on 1 September 2019, and that the proceedings were therefore dismissed following that withdrawal. No monetary award or remedy figure was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The judgment says the claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings on 6 January 2019. It also records that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal after settlement by COT3. | Settled | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to accrued holiday pay. It records settlement by COT3 and subsequent dismissal following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to unpaid wages prior to 7 January 2019. It records settlement by COT3 and subsequent dismissal following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
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.