Case 1300320/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Weller v Haulbros Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1300320/2024
- Decision date
- 17 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kight Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Weller
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham Employment Tribunal by CVP on 17 June 2024 before Employment Judge Kight. The claimant, Mr M Weller, did not attend the hearing, and the respondent, Haulbros Limited, was represented by Mr A Gedos.
The tribunal recorded that it had considered the information available and made such enquiries as were practicable about the reason for the claimant's absence. Pursuant to Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules, the tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
No remedy was awarded. The written record also notes that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested in accordance with the tribunal's stated procedure.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 of the ET Rules after the claimant failed to attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 of the ET Rules after the claimant failed to attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the ET Rules
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.