Case 3302891/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Davis v Miss L Davis Mr J Loveridge and Grahame Davis — 2020
- Case reference
- 3302891/2020
- Decision date
- 21 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vowles Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Davis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 31 July 2020 the tribunal wrote to the claimants saying an Employment Judge was considering striking out the claims against Grahame Davis because they appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success, as the claimants did not appear to have been employed by him. The claimants were given until 24 August 2020 to explain why the claims should not be dismissed.
The claimants replied that they wished to pursue Moto-Build Limited rather than Grahame Davis. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claims against Grahame Davis with effect from 24 August 2020. The judgment records that claims against Moto-Build Limited were stayed in a separate letter from the tribunal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause(s) of action in the extracted text. It dismisses the claims against Grahame Davis under rule 37 after warning that they appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success because the claimants did not appear to have been employed by him. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.