Case 3331295/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Turner v The Entertainer (Amersham) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3331295/2018
- Decision date
- 17 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Turner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Anstis sat alone in Reading on 17 January 2020. The written record states that the claimant's claims were dismissed, but it does not set out the underlying findings or identify the individual heads of claim in the body of the judgment.
The note at the end records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No award or other remedy is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written record does not identify the particular allegations under this head; it records only that the claimant's claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The written record does not identify the particular allegations under this head; it records only that the claimant's claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written record does not identify the particular allegations under this head; it records only that the claimant's claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written record does not identify the particular allegations under this head; it records only that the claimant's claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.