Case 3305520/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Subrovskis, brother For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 3305520/2020
- Decision date
- 22 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr K Subrovskis, brother For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing at Watford on 15 September 2021 before Employment Judge Bedeau. The judgment records the respondent's application for deposit orders in respect of the claimant's direct age discrimination and breach of contract claims. The application was refused.
The written judgment does not set out detailed reasons because reasons were given orally at the hearing. It therefore records the procedural outcome only, and does not contain any substantive determination of liability or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment records only the respondent's application for deposit orders in respect of this direct age discrimination claim. The application was refused; no substantive liability finding is set out in the written text. | Other | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records only the respondent's application for deposit orders in respect of this claim. The application was refused; no substantive liability finding is set out in the written text. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.