Case 1301573/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Miss M Lynch v Kingdom Services Group Limited — 2022

Case reference: 1301573/2021
Decision date: 30 June 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Woffenden Representation

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss M Lynch

Respondent

Kingdom Services Group Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant did not attend and was not represented at the hearing on 29 June 2022. The respondent was represented by a solicitor.

The tribunal considered the information available to it and dismissed the claim under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. No remedy was awarded in the written judgment.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment states that the claim was dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend or be represented. The specific pleaded claims are not set out in the judgment text; this entry reflects the gov.uk listing category.	Dismissed	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment states that the claim was dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend or be represented. The specific pleaded claims are not set out in the judgment text; this entry reflects the gov.uk listing category.	Dismissed	—	—
Breach of contract	The judgment states that the claim was dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend or be represented. The specific pleaded claims are not set out in the judgment text; this entry reflects the gov.uk listing category.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.