Mr M Ktenas v Quilter plc and Quilter Financial Planning Ltd: 2203260/2020

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 2203260/2020

Between

Mr M KtenasClaimant

Mr D Fawcett (Solicitor)Respondent

Before

Employment Judge Mr J Burns

In person for claimant

Mr D Fawcett (instructed by Solicitor) for respondent

Date 11 September 2020

JUDGMENT

The claims are dismissed against both Respondents on withdrawal by the Claimant. NOTE During a telephone hearing today the Claimant confirmed that he was paid and had his employment contract with R2 and he accepted that he was not employed and had no claim against R1, and that the claim against R1 would have to be withdrawn in any event. He also explained that he had an EC certificate with R2’s name on it predating the issuing of these proceedings. Insofar as the claim against R2 was concerned I explained to the Claimant that(i) per Coors Brewers v Adcock

2007 IRLR 440

CA a wages claim under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996 can only be brought in respect of an identifiable sum – ie straightforward claims where the employee can point to a quantified loss – and that it was insufficient for the sum to be capable of being quantified by the tribunal – (ie a wages claim must be for a debt and not for damages);

(ii) that (per the ET’s Extension of Jurisdiction (E and W) Order 1994 regulation 3), a contract claim in the ET could only be brought on a claim which arises or was due on the termination of employment;

(iii) that for these reasons and based on the ET1 and on what the Claimant told me during our discussion, the claim had little reasonable prospect of success and

(iv) I was contemplating ordering the Claimant to pay a deposit as a condition of the matter being permitted to proceed to a final hearing, and that he would have 21 days to decide whether or not to pay any deposit I ordered. In response the Claimant confirmed that he did not want to waste time and generate extra work by my making a deposit order and he wished to withdraw his claims on the basis confirmed by Mr Fawcett that no costs would be pursued against him. Mr J S Burns