Case 3319500/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Parus Bhardwaj v Insultec Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3319500/2019
- Decision date
- 28 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Parus Bhardwaj
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard Parus Bhardwaj's claims against Insultec Ltd at Watford on 26-28 April 2021, with the hearing conducted on a remote video platform under hearing code V. The judgment records that the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and unlawful deductions from wages were each found not well founded and dismissed.
The written record does not set out detailed reasons for those dismissals. It states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days; the judgment document itself therefore contains only the operative findings and the procedural note about reasons.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment states the claim was 'not well founded and is dismissed.' | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Judgment states the claim was 'not well founded and is dismissed.' | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states the claim for unlawful deductions from wages was 'not well founded and is dismissed.' | Dismissed | — | — |
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.