Case 1600724/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G K Williams v Aneurin Bevan Local Health Board — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600724/2019
- Decision date
- 19 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Davies Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G K Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal dismissed Mr G K Williams's claim under Rule 12(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The reasons recorded that the ET1 stated the respondent had been in touch with ACAS for Early Conciliation, that the respondent denied this, and that the claimant provided no evidence to support the assertion. The tribunal also noted that there was no ACAS Early Conciliation certificate.
Mr Williams did not attend the hearing on 18 November 2019, so the tribunal recorded that the claim could also have been dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judge referred to an earlier claim between the same parties, case 1600994/2018, which had been dismissed for non-attendance on similar facts, and noted that the earlier judgment contained a typographical error in the case number.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The reasons do not identify the substantive claim type(s); the claim was dismissed procedurally under Rule 12(1)(d). | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 12(1)(d) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 47 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.