Case 8001944/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Swinfen v No appearance and No representation Sleeperz Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 8001944/2025
- Decision date
- 22 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Strain
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Swinfen
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal granted Sleeperz Limited's application to strike out Mr T Swinfen's claims under Rule 38(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The order applied collectively to the claims and the written judgment did not set out separate determinations for the unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages, or breach of contract heads.
Mr Swinfen did not appear and was not represented at the hearing on 16 June 2026. Sleeperz Limited was represented by Ms C Kamsika, solicitor. The Tribunal stated that oral reasons were provided to the parties at the conclusion of the hearing; no monetary remedy was recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The strike-out order applies collectively to the Claimant's claims; the written judgment does not separately identify this claim or give claim-specific reasons. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The strike-out order applies collectively to the Claimant's claims; the written judgment does not separately identify this claim or give claim-specific reasons. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The strike-out order applies collectively to the Claimant's claims; the written judgment does not separately identify this claim or give claim-specific reasons. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 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.