Case 6013503/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Aspden v Secretary of State for Business & Trade and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013503/2024
- Decision date
- 25 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr C Aspden
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing before Employment Judge Brewer at Midlands East by CVP on 25 February 2025. The first respondent was represented by Ms L Whalley, and the second respondent did not attend.
The Tribunal gave judgment that the claimant's claims under case number 6013503/2024 failed and were dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the applicable time limit.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims under this case number fail and are dismissed; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment does not set out particulars. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims under this case number fail and are dismissed; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment does not set out particulars. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims under this case number fail and are dismissed; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment does not set out particulars. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims under this case number fail and are dismissed; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment does not set out particulars. | 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.