Case 3309827/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss H Isaacs Mrs N Canter Mrs A Killingback Mr G Leay Mr P Fuller Mr K Lucas Mr A Priestly Mr M Crowson Mr D Maggs Mr L Boyes v Clerkin Civils Ltd and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 3309827/2022
- Decision date
- 20 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss H Isaacs Mrs N Canter Mrs A Killingback Mr G Leay Mr P Fuller Mr K Lucas Mr A Priestly Mr M Crowson Mr D Maggs Mr L Boyes
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records complaints of breach of contract, holiday pay and redundancy against Clerkin Civils Ltd and the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.
The Tribunal had written to the claimants on 20 April 2022 giving them an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why those complaints should not be struck out because they had not been actively pursued. The claimants failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the complaints.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The complaint was struck out because it had not been actively pursued after the claimants failed to make representations, sufficient representations, or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The complaint was struck out because it had not been actively pursued after the claimants failed to make representations, sufficient representations, or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment refers to the complaint as redundancy; classified as redundancy_pay based on the available taxonomy. | 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.