Case 3311844/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Scott Smith for himself and the other claimants. For the v Mr R Hickford (Solicitor). — 2021
- Case reference
- 3311844/2020
- Decision date
- 1 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Scott Smith for himself and the other claimants. For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing at Bury St Edmunds on 26 August 2021 before Employment Judge Laidler concerned three claimants, Mr Scott Smith, Dominic Goldsmith and Jake Bush. The judgment recorded that each claimant's unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed on withdrawal. It also recorded that the claims against Mr West, who had been named as a respondent, were dismissed on withdrawal and that the claims would proceed against Style Mobility Limited.
No liability findings or remedy figures were recorded in this written judgment. The note at the end states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Complaint of unfair dismissal by Mr Scott Smith dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Complaint of unfair dismissal by Dominic Goldsmith dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Complaint of unfair dismissal by Jake Bush dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.