Case 3202199/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Clements v Mode Logistics Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3202199/2018
- Decision date
- 1 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs GA Everett, Mr K Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Clements
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at East London Hearing Centre on 16 and 17 October 2019 before Employment Judge G Tobin with lay members Mrs GA Everett and Mr K Ross. The claimant was Mr S Clements and the respondent was Mode Logistics Limited. The judgment records representation by Ms M Clements for the claimant and Mr G Self, counsel, for the respondent.
The judgment contains two disposal paragraphs only. It records that the claimant's age discrimination claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. It also records that, upon the parties coming to terms of settlement, the claimant's unfair dismissal case was dismissed upon withdrawal.
No liability findings, legal tests, or remedy awards are set out in the judgment text provided. The outcome recorded is that both claims were withdrawn, with the unfair dismissal claim noted as having been resolved by settlement before dismissal upon withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment records that the age discrimination claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that, upon the parties coming to terms of settlement, the unfair dismissal case was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.