Case 6001836/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Letch v Go South Coast Ltd t/a Morebus — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001836/2025
- Decision date
- 1 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
- Venue
- by CVP from the Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Letch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for a final hearing on 3 and 4 November 2025, but at the hearing on 3 November 2025 counsel for both parties confirmed that the Claimant had agreed to withdraw his unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims, provided the Respondent confirmed that it would not apply for costs. The tribunal therefore dismissed both claims on withdrawal.
The tribunal also recorded the parties' agreement that the Respondent's name should be corrected to Go South Coast Ltd. In the reasons, Employment Judge Woodhead referred to the withdrawal and dismissal provisions in rules 50 and 51 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024, and the corresponding provisions in the 2013 Rules of Procedure.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal after the Claimant agreed to withdraw the claim, subject to the Respondent confirming it would not apply for costs. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal after the Claimant agreed to withdraw the claim, subject to the Respondent confirming it would not apply for costs. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rules 51 and 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rules 50 and 51 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
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.