Case 3313909/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Janota v Mintcoaches Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3313909/2021
- Decision date
- 31 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill.
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Janota
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 28 October 2021, the Tribunal gave Mr J Janota an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out on the basis that it was scandalous or vexatious, in the sense of being pursued for an improper motive, to cause disruption, or without any expectation of success, or because it had no reasonable prospect of success.
Mr Janota did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The judgment records that, because the claim was struck out, the Tribunal would not make a decision about the factual allegations.
The judgment also states that nothing in it prevented Mr Janota from raising the matters with HMRC or any other appropriate body if he wished to do so.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim was struck out after the claimant failed to make written representations or request a hearing in response to the Tribunal's 28 October 2021 letter. The judgment does not decide the underlying factual allegations or identify the substantive claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- scandalous or vexatious
- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.