Case 3304178/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr JV Colombo v Mindfuture World Ltd and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 3304178/2020
- Decision date
- 16 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr JV Colombo
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningClaim number 3304178/2020 was withdrawn by the claimant. The tribunal therefore dismissed that claim on the basis of the withdrawal and made no findings on the merits of any underlying issue.
By letter dated 21 November 2021, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, on why claim number 3304493/2020 should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not make representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
On that basis, claim number 3304493/2020 was struck out. The judgment records no remedy, award, or merits determination.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim number 3304178/2020 was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed on that basis. The judgment does not state the underlying substantive cause of action in this order. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim number 3304493/2020 was struck out because the claimant did not make written representations, or any sufficient representations, after being given the opportunity to explain why it should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. The judgment does not state the underlying substantive cause of action in this order. | 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.