Case 1304691/2021 · Employment Tribunal
no appearance For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1304691/2021
- Decision date
- 15 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton Appearance
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
1 namedClaimant
no appearance For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a private preliminary hearing on 15 May 2023, the tribunal dismissed the claimant’s claims under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The claimant did not attend and had not notified the tribunal in advance. When contacted, he said he believed the hearing was listed for 28 May 2023 and suggested his confusion was due to his alleged dyslexia.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been ordered since February 2022 to provide full details and disclosure relating to his alleged disability and had repeatedly failed to do so despite chasers, extensions, further orders and adjustments. The judge recorded that this hearing itself had been arranged as an adjustment, that three previous hearings had been postponed, and that the claimant had also failed fully to comply with orders made at the previous hearing on 30 January 2023.
The tribunal considered that there was nothing to show the claimant had been unable either to provide at least some of the required documentation and information or to attend the hearing. In those circumstances, the judge concluded there was little realistic prospect of obtaining the further material or attendance needed to progress the case, that no progress could be made that day, and that dismissal of the claims was in the interests of justice.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing categories because the judgment text dismisses all claims under rule 47 but does not enumerate the pleaded causes of action. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing categories because the judgment text dismisses all claims under rule 47 but does not enumerate the pleaded causes of action. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing categories because the judgment text dismisses all claims under rule 47 but does not enumerate the pleaded causes of action. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing categories because the judgment text dismisses all claims under rule 47 but does not enumerate the pleaded causes of action. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing categories because the judgment text dismisses all claims under rule 47 but does not enumerate the pleaded causes of action. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- interests of justice
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.