Case 1300061/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Wallace v Topcat Brewery Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1300061/2023
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Childe REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Wallace
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham by CVP on 5 May 2023 before Employment Judge Childe. Neither party attended in person. The judgment records that the claimant was telephoned at the start of the hearing and was told the tribunal was calling; she then put the phone down and did not attend.
In those circumstances, the tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's complaints claims under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment contains no separate findings on the merits of the underlying claims and records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not set out this head separately; all of the claimant's complaints claims were dismissed under rule 47 after she did not attend. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment does not set out this head separately; all of the claimant's complaints claims were dismissed under rule 47 after she did not attend. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not set out this head separately; all of the claimant's complaints claims were dismissed under rule 47 after she did not attend. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.