Case 1400852/2023 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1400852/2023
- Decision date
- 19 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Appearances
- Venue
- Exeter
Parties
1 namedClaimant
No attendance
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 4 January 2024, Employment Judge Smail struck out the Claimant's claims for non-pursuit. The judgment records that the Claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing on 24 October 2023, did not provide the explanation she had been ordered to provide, did not provide further information, and did not provide a schedule of loss.
The judgment also records that the Claimant confirmed she would not attend the 4 January 2024 hearing. No liability findings or remedy assessment were made, and the decision sent on 19 January 2024 records only the strike-out of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The extracted judgment text records only that the Claimant's claims were struck out for non-pursuit. The claim type is taken from the case context/layer 1 listing supplied with the file. | Struck out | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The extracted judgment text records only that the Claimant's claims were struck out for non-pursuit. The claim type is taken from the case context/layer 1 listing supplied with the file. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment text records only that the Claimant's claims were struck out for non-pursuit. The claim type is taken from the case context/layer 1 listing supplied with the file. | Struck out | — | — |
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.