Case 6002441/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M R Ward v Advanced Marble and Granite UK Ltd (in liquidation) and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002441/2025
- Decision date
- 23 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heather REPRESENTATION
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr M R Ward
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the CVP hearing in Newcastle-upon-Tyne on 23 June 2025, Employment Judge Heather found that Mr M R Ward was not an employee of Advanced Marble and Granite UK Ltd (in liquidation) at the relevant time. That finding was determinative of the case because the tribunal held that it therefore lacked jurisdiction to determine the monetary claims brought against the first respondent.
The tribunal dismissed the claims for unlawful deductions from wages in respect of arrears of pay, notice pay, holiday pay and redundancy payment. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for arrears of pay dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the first respondent at the relevant time and therefore had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the first respondent at the relevant time and therefore had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim for holiday pay dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the first respondent at the relevant time and therefore had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Claim for redundancy payment dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the first respondent at the relevant time and therefore had no jurisdiction. | 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.