Case 3324162/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L El Abed Mr A East Mr W El Abed Miss E Poole v Bradshaw Support Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3324162/2019
- Decision date
- 5 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L El Abed Mr A East Mr W El Abed Miss E Poole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 20 June 2022, the Tribunal gave the claimants an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claims should not be struck out because they had not been actively pursued. The case numbers 3324162/2019 to 3324165/2019 were before Employment Judge Bedeau, sitting alone.
The claimants did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claims on 5 August 2022. The judgment records no findings on the merits of the underlying complaints and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Struck out because the claims were not actively pursued; the judgment records no merits findings. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out because the claims were not actively pursued; the judgment records no merits findings. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Struck out because the claims were not actively pursued; the judgment records no merits findings. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.