Case 3213169/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Wyness v Rigging Services Direct Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3213169/2020
- Decision date
- 28 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Wyness
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge Gardiner at East London Hearing Centre by Cloud Video Platform on 28 April 2021. The claimant did not attend and the respondent was represented by Mr D Bansal, Senior Litigator.
The tribunal recorded that all of the claimant's complaints were struck out because each complaint had been presented outside the statutory time periods. On that basis, the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to consider any of the complaints on their merits.
No substantive findings were made on the underlying complaints, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | All of the claimant's complaints were struck out because they were presented outside the statutory time periods, so the tribunal did not consider this complaint on its merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | All of the claimant's complaints were struck out because they were presented outside the statutory time periods, so the tribunal did not consider this complaint on its merits. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | All of the claimant's complaints were struck out because they were presented outside the statutory time periods, so the tribunal did not consider this complaint on its merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | All of the claimant's complaints were struck out because they were presented outside the statutory time periods, so the tribunal did not consider this complaint on its merits. | Struck out | — | — |
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.