Case 1402969/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Guy v Greenmachine SW Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402969/2022
- Decision date
- 1 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lambert Representation
- Venue
- Remotely
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Guy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Guy brought a claim against Greenmachine SW Ltd. The case was listed for a remote video hearing on 19 January 2023. On 18 January 2023 the claimant asked for a postponement, saying she was working in Kent and could not attend, but the application was refused because the claim had been presented on 13 September 2022, notice of hearing had been sent on 1 November 2022, and the hearing was by video so her location was not relevant.
The claimant then confirmed to Tribunal staff on the morning of the hearing that she would not attend. The respondent’s representative attended and was ready to proceed. Taking account of the claimant’s non-attendance, the overriding objective, and the costs and inconvenience caused to the respondent, Employment Judge Lambert dismissed the claim under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the underlying dismissal claim and does not award a remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not determine the claim on its merits; it was dismissed after the claimant did not attend the hearing and her postponement application was refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 47
- overriding objective
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.