Case 3300459/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Dave Long v Arrow Precision Manufacturing Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300459/2022
- Decision date
- 21 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Hunt Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Dave Long
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Reading by video on 6 and 7 November 2023 before Employment Judge K Hunt. The tribunal gave oral reasons at the hearing and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The claimant, Mr Dave Long, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr Brudenell-Bruce, the respondent's managing director.
The tribunal held that the constructive dismissal claim was not well founded and dismissed it. It also held that the claim for 4 weeks' wages relating to the period of lay off was not well founded and dismissed that claim. No remedy or award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for 4 weeks' wages relating to the period of lay off; classified as unlawful deduction from wages because no other claim type is identified in the judgment. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.