Case 3320642/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Tudor-Andrei Raneti v Exclusive Contract Services Limited and 2 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 3320642/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren JUDGMENT
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr Tudor-Andrei Raneti
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 12 July 2022, Employment Judge M Warren gave the Claimant notice to show cause why his claims should not be struck out for conduct said to be scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious. The notice was posted to the Claimant on 11 September 2022.
The reasons record that on 12 September 2022 the Claimant emailed the Tribunal referring to Tribunal staff as being mentally ill and having schizophrenia, and suggesting that they had been bribed and had lied. The Judge said those emails, together with subsequent emails from the Respondent's solicitors, did not come to the Judge's attention until the date of the decision.
The Judge found that the Claimant had failed to show cause why his claims should not be struck out. The judgment therefore struck out the Claimant's claims on the grounds that his conduct had been scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious. The judgment was sent to the parties on 21 July 2023.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the individual claim heads; it states that the Claimant's claims were struck out collectively for conduct found to be scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.