Case 1800820/2023 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance For the v Mr S Calvert, manager, with Mr Foster-Morgan, shift manager — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800820/2023
- Decision date
- 15 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No attendance For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final hearing in Leeds on 14 June 2023, the claimant did not attend and was not represented. The respondent attended by Mr S Calvert, manager, and Mr Foster-Morgan, shift manager. The judge recorded that the claimant had presented complaints of constructive unfair dismissal, other payments, and 'using drugs to me', and that standard directions had been issued after the claims were presented on 31 January 2023 and listed for hearing by notice dated 22 February 2023.
The judge said there had been no contact from the claimant since he left his employment, no compliance with the standard case management orders, and no response when the tribunal clerk called the two telephone numbers given on the ET1. After considering whether to adjourn, proceed in the claimant's absence, or dismiss under Rule 47, the judge concluded that dismissal was fair in all the circumstances. The judgment notes that deciding the merits in a party's absence would not often be consistent with justice, and that if the claimant later had a good explanation for non-attendance he could seek reconsideration. All claims were dismissed, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment described this complaint as 'using drugs to me' and said that, at face value, it was a police matter rather than an Employment Tribunal case. It was dismissed under Rule 47. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment described this complaint as 'constructive unfair dismissal' and dismissed the claims under Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend or arrange representation. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment referred to this only as 'other payments' and did not identify the legal basis. It was dismissed under Rule 47 with the other claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47
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.