Case 1305140/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. Z Zahid v Jaguar Land Rover Limited HELD AT: BIRMINGHAM REMOTELY BY CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 1305140/2024
- Decision date
- 24 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge MANLEY
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. Z Zahid
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant did not attend the hearing. The Tribunal made enquiries to determine whether he planned to attend, including a telephone call and an email, but received no response. The Tribunal therefore decided to proceed in the Claimant's absence under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
Having proceeded in the Claimant's absence, the Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 of the 2013 Rules on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment text does not specify the underlying claim type(s). The Tribunal proceeded in the Claimant's absence under rule 47 after no attendance and no response to telephone or email enquiries, and struck out the claim under rule 37 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.