Case 3320648/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Cook v Bateman Groundworks Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320648/2019
- Decision date
- 12 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heal Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the proceedings in case 3320648/2019 were dismissed following a withdrawal of the claim by the claimant and a withdrawal of the respondent's costs claim. No reasons on the merits are given, and the tribunal does not make findings on liability for the pleaded claims.
On the information in the judgment, the case was disposed of by withdrawal rather than by determination after a hearing. The judgment therefore records the procedural outcome only, without deciding the substance of the underlying claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. It does not separate any individual claim outcomes or decide the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. It does not separate any individual claim outcomes or decide the merits. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. It does not separate any individual claim outcomes or decide the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. It does not separate any individual claim outcomes or decide the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. It does not separate any individual claim outcomes or decide the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.