Case 1800757/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1800757/2021
- Decision date
- 24 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr T Downes, Mr L Priestley
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not attend For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing on 24 May 2022. Employment Judge Davies, sitting with Mr T Downes and Mr L Priestley, recorded that the claimant had not produced a witness statement in breach of tribunal orders and had not contacted the tribunal to explain his absence. The tribunal also tried to call him, but his phone number was not recognised.
Because the claimant was absent, the tribunal dismissed the claim pursuant to Employment Tribunal Rule 47. The reasons state that the burden of proof in the automatically unfair dismissal complaint was on the claimant, and that in the detriment and discrimination complaints he had the initial burden of proving facts from which inferences could be drawn. The tribunal considered dismissal consistent with the overriding objective in those circumstances. No substantive merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Employment Tribunal Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend the hearing. The reasons refer to an automatically unfair dismissal complaint, but no substantive findings were made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed under Employment Tribunal Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend the hearing. The reasons refer to detriment and discrimination complaints, but no substantive findings were made. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.