Case 3303737/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Locke v Simple Recruitment Services Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3303737/2019
- Decision date
- 3 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Locke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Locke's claims against Simple Recruitment Services Limited were heard at Reading on 2-3 January 2020 before Employment Judge Anstis sitting alone. The written judgment records that the claimant's claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written record states only that 'The claimant's claims are dismissed'; individual claims are not separately set out in the extracted text. This claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The written record states only that 'The claimant's claims are dismissed'; individual claims are not separately set out in the extracted text. This claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states only that 'The claimant's claims are dismissed'; individual claims are not separately set out in the extracted text. This claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written record states only that 'The claimant's claims are dismissed'; individual claims are not separately set out in the extracted text. This claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written record states only that 'The claimant's claims are dismissed'; individual claims are not separately set out in the extracted text. This claim type is taken from the case listing context. | 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.
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.