Case 6038872/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Yanik Leleu v Scruffy Dog Productions Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6038872/2025
- Decision date
- 10 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Yanik Leleu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the Claimant's application for interim relief under Section 128 Employment Rights Act 1996 at the East London Hearing Centre by CVP on 10 December 2025. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by Mr Dylan Lardner-Burke, Managing Director.
The Tribunal decided that the application for interim relief was not well founded and dismissed it. The written judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the specified period.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states only that the Claimant's application for interim relief under Section 128 Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded and was dismissed. The underlying substantive claim is not identified in the written judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 128 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.