Case 6000966/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Eiji Daang v Moses Motzen — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000966/2025
- Decision date
- 21 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Balroop Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Eiji Daang
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard at East London Hearing Centre by video on 21 May 2025 before Employment Judge D Balroop. Neither party attended. The claimant had brought claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy, notice pay and arrears of pay, and the respondent had not filed a response.
By telephone on the day of the hearing, the claimant told the tribunal that he had settled with the respondent and wanted to withdraw the claim. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claims pursuant to Rule 50 upon withdrawal. No findings on the merits were made and no monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment uses the term 'redundancy' and does not give any further particulars. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Mapped from the judgment's 'notice pay' claim; no merits findings or award were recorded. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mapped from the judgment's 'arrears of pay' claim; no merits findings or award were 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 | Withdrawn | — | — |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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.