Case 3310146/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Lorrio v Grayson Insurance (Consultants) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3310146/2021
- Decision date
- 4 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Lorrio
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing by video in Watford on 4 April 2022 before Employment Judge R Lewis, the respondent's applications for deposit orders and/or strike out were refused. The written judgment then records that the claimant withdrew three claims: automatic unfair dismissal under ERA section 104, any claim for victimisation, and the unlawful deductions claim relating to January 2021 earnings.
Those claims were therefore dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment contains no merits findings on liability and no remedy award, and the written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing so no written reasons were provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records withdrawal of the claim for automatic unfair dismissal under ERA s.104. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that any claim for victimisation was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records withdrawal of the unlawful deductions claim relating to January 2021 earnings. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.