Case 3324653/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Calauz v Bluerock Recruitment Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3324653/2019
- Decision date
- 5 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Calauz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Bedeau issued a Rule 21 judgment dated 12 February 2020 after no response had been received from Bluerock Recruitment Ltd. The judgment states that Mr S Calauz's claims succeeded, but it does not set out findings on the underlying merits beyond the respondent's failure to present a response.
The tribunal directed that the case would be listed for a remedy hearing, with notice to follow. No monetary award or breakdown of any award is recorded in this judgment, and the judgment was entered in the register on 5 March 2020.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing category for public interest disclosure; the judgment itself only records that the claimant's claims succeeded under Rule 21 after no response was received. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing category; the judgment itself only records that the claimant's claims succeeded under Rule 21 after no response was received. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.