Mr S Smith v Liverpool Food Company Ltd: 2405662/2019
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s claim already includes a complaint that he was required to work excessive weekly hours in breach of regulation 4 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and he is not required to amend his claim in order to pursue it. (This part of the claim is subject to a separate strike-out warning).[2]The claimant is required to amend his claim in order to pursue a complaint that the respondent breached regulation 11 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 by failing to provide him with a weekly rest period.[3]Permission to make that amendment is refused.[4]The claimant is required to amend his claim in order to pursue a claim for damages for breach of contract or a complaint of unlawful deduction from wages arising from the non-payment of his bonus.[5]Permission to make that amendment is also refused. Case no.2405662/2019 2[6]This judgment does not affect the claimant’s complaint of unfair constructive dismissal, which will proceed to a final hearing. _____________________________ Employment Judge Horne 17 September 2019 SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 15 October 2019 FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party makes a request in writing within 14 days of the date on which this judgment is sent to the parties. If written reasons are provided, they will be entered into the tribunal’s online register, which is visible to search engines. Case No:2405662/2019 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr S Smith Respondent: Liverpool Food Company (Courtyard Bar & Kitchen)