Case 1601133/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Lewis v Axiom Ince Limited (in administration) In chambers — 2025
- Case reference
- 1601133/2024
- Decision date
- 9 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Lewis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs C Lewis brought claims recorded in the reasons as protective award, unfair dismissal, and notice pay/breach of contract. The judgment notes that her claim form was presented on 29 April 2024, that she identified 9 November 2023 as her dismissal date, and that ACAS conciliation did not begin until April 2024. On the face of the papers, the tribunal considered the relevant three-month time limits to have been missed.
A public preliminary hearing was listed to address the time limit points. The tribunal records that notice of hearing and the CVP link were emailed to the claimant, and that when she did not attend the clerk telephoned her. She said she was at work and in meetings, and later emailed that she was not aware of the hearing and had previously had problems receiving emails from LeedsET. The judge waited until 12.10 to allow time for her to join.
Applying Rule 47, and weighing the circumstances, the tribunal dismissed the claims in the interests of justice because the claimant did not attend. The judge observed that the claims appeared to face time limit hurdles and may have had limited value after mitigation, including possible statutory payments and new employment, but no substantive merits findings were made. The judgment also notes that if the claimant sought reconsideration, she would need to provide witness evidence and the relevant documents on the time limit issue before any revived hearing could proceed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claim; dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend the public preliminary hearing. No merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend the public preliminary hearing. No merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay / breach of contract claim; dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend the public preliminary hearing. No merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 47
- Polkey deduction
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.