Case 3332136/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 3332136/2018
- Decision date
- 8 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims against Prickett & Ellis Property Management Ltd. The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing before Employment Judge R Lewis at Watford on 4 February 2020.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims because the respondent had been dissolved on 8 October 2019. No remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out because the respondent had been dissolved on 8 October 2019. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories rather than set out in the judgment body. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out because the respondent had been dissolved on 8 October 2019. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories rather than set out in the judgment body. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out because the respondent had been dissolved on 8 October 2019. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories rather than set out in the judgment body. | 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.