Case 3322299/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person. For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 3322299/2019
- Decision date
- 9 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Moore Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person. For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a short disposal decision. It records that, further to rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, claim number 3322299/2019 was dismissed on withdrawal. No substantive findings on liability or remedy were made in this case.
Schedule A amends the list of issues in claim number 3335148/2018 to include an unlawful deduction of wages issue about what wages were properly payable to the claimant while employed as a consultant. The schedule notes the claimant's contention that he should have received £103,490 per annum, that he was paid £86,369 per annum, and that while still employed the panel offered to pay £92,078 per annum, which the claimant rejected. It also records that the claimant and respondent agreed that, at a minimum, the claimant was entitled to a pro-rata salary of £92,078 per annum during the period of employment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that claim number 3322299/2019 was dismissed on withdrawal under rule 52; no merits determination or award is recorded. | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.