Case 3312896/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Henley v Windmill Property Services Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3312896/2020
- Decision date
- 14 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley Signed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Henley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out all of Mr N Henley's claims in case 3312896/2020, including his claims for notice pay, holiday pay, arrears of pay and any other payments said to be due in connection with his employment with Windmill Property Services Ltd. The strike-out was made under rule 37 after the Tribunal found that the claimant had failed to comply with the Tribunal's order of 9 May 2021 and had not provided the information and disclosure requested by the respondent in its letter of 15 April 2021.
The reasons record that the claimant was given repeated opportunities to respond. The Tribunal wrote to him on 1 November 2021 warning that the claim might be struck out, and when he said in an email of 2 November 2021 that he could not open attachments, the Tribunal re-sent the correspondence by first class post on 8 December 2021. No further representations were received. The Tribunal noted that the respondent still could not prepare its witness statement because the claimant had not supplied the requested list of documents or disclosure.
The Tribunal concluded that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success, that the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted by the claimant was unreasonable, that the claim had not been actively pursued, and that there was no indication it would be properly prepared for the final hearing listed for 11 March 2022. That hearing did not go ahead. The Tribunal also ordered the claimant to pay the respondent's costs in the sum of £250 inclusive of VAT, because of the unreasonable way in which he had conducted the proceedings.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the notice pay element of the proceedings, but did not make any merits finding or separate award on that issue. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment struck out the holiday pay element of the proceedings, but did not determine the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment struck out the arrears of pay element of the proceedings, but did not determine the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £250
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 37
- no reasonable prospect of success
- scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious
- not actively pursued
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.