Case 1600734/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Stevenson v Lyons Holiday Park Limited Heard: via video — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600734/2020
- Decision date
- 18 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Stevenson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing on 16 June 2020 was listed to consider whether the final hearing due on 26 June 2020 could proceed in light of Covid-19 restrictions. On 12 June 2020, the claimant emailed the Tribunal saying that his claims had been compromised and that neither hearing was required.
The Employment Judge then emailed the claimant, copied to the respondent, asking him to confirm that he was withdrawing the claims so they could be dismissed on withdrawal. No reply was received. When the hearing began, neither party attended, and after a ten-minute wait that position remained unchanged. The judge exercised the power under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure and dismissed the claims because of the failure to attend or be represented.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to this claim as one for 'unauthorised deductions from wages'. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.