Case 3302385/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J McGall v Newlyweds Foods Ltd and 4 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 3302385/2022
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Date
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Mr J McGall
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 6 November 2022, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal claim against respondents 2 to 5, and the age discrimination claims against respondents 3 to 5, should not be struck out because they had no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim against Simon Lambirth, Laura Campbell, Gary Washbourne and Malcolm Fowler, and struck out the age discrimination claims against Laura Campbell, Gary Washbourne and Malcolm Fowler.
The Tribunal recorded that the preliminary hearing listed for 8 December 2022 remained as listed. No monetary award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out against respondents Simon Lambirth, Laura Campbell, Gary Washbourne and Malcolm Fowler because the claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing after the Tribunal indicated the claim had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Struck out against respondents Laura Campbell, Gary Washbourne and Malcolm Fowler because the claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing after the Tribunal indicated the claim had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospect of success
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.