Case 1303855/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Stephen Butler v EP1 Group Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1303855/2023
- Decision date
- 23 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Stephen Butler
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Birmingham by video on 23 October 2023, Employment Judge C H O’Rourke recorded that Mr Stephen Butler was not in attendance and was not represented. The respondent was also not in attendance and was not represented. The judgment states that the claimant provided no written representations and no evidence in support of his claims.
Subject to Rule 47 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, the tribunal dismissed the claims identified in the judgment: unfair dismissal, failure to pay a redundancy payment, failure to provide pay in lieu of notice, arrears of pay generally, holiday pay, and other payments. The extracted judgment contains no merits findings on liability and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend the hearing, provided no written representations, and no evidence was before the tribunal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The claim for failure to pay a redundancy payment was dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance and lack of evidence. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim for failure to provide pay in lieu of notice was dismissed under Rule 47; the judgment uses that wording rather than a separate legal label. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim described as arrears of pay generally was dismissed under Rule 47. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for holiday pay was dismissed under Rule 47. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment also refers to 'other payments'; no further detail is given in the extracted text. | 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.