Case 3307270/2023 · Employment Tribunal
S Cook v Cpm — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307270/2023
- Decision date
- 9 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment recorded after a hearing at Reading by CVP on 9 April 2024 before Employment Judge Anstis sitting alone. The claimant, S Cook, appeared in person and the respondent, CPM, was represented by Mr T Hussain, litigation consultant.
The written judgment states that the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal and for notice pay were struck out. No written reasons are provided in the record, and the document says that reasons were given orally at the hearing. The record does not set out the factual or procedural basis for the strike-out.
No remedy was awarded in the written judgment. The record is limited to the strike-out outcome and the administrative note that written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note at the end of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states that the unfair dismissal claim was struck out, but it does not set out the basis for strike-out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The written record states that the claim for notice pay was struck out, but it does not specify the legal basis or whether it was pleaded as breach of contract or wrongful dismissal. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.