Case 3300831/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R CONNOR v Howden Joinery Group plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 3300831/2024
- Decision date
- 7 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R CONNOR
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr R Connor's claims against Howden Joinery LTD. The judgment identified the claims struck out as unfair dismissal, age discrimination, Public Interest Disclosure Act, and unpaid wages.
The reason given was that the claimant had continued to fail to comply with Tribunal Orders and had failed to provide further and better particulars pursuant to an unless order made on 3 February 2025. The judgment did not record any determination on the merits of the claims and did not record any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out after continued failure to comply with Tribunal Orders and to provide further and better particulars pursuant to an unless order made on 3 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Struck out after continued failure to comply with Tribunal Orders and to provide further and better particulars pursuant to an unless order made on 3 February 2025. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment described this as a Public Interest Disclosure Act claim and struck it out after continued failure to comply with Tribunal Orders and to provide further and better particulars pursuant to an unless order made on 3 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment described this as an Unpaid Wages claim and struck it out after continued failure to comply with Tribunal Orders and to provide further and better particulars pursuant to an unless order made on 3 February 2025. | 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.