Case 2200199/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J S Belo v Pizza Express (Restaurants) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2200199/2020
- Decision date
- 15 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge H Grewal
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Ms J Cameron, Mr A Adolphus
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J S Belo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J S Belo did not attend the hearing at London Central on 22 September 2020. The Tribunal recorded that notice of the hearing had been sent on 28 January 2020 and again on 18 May 2020 after the preliminary hearing, and that the hearing date had also been referred to in numerous emails from the Respondent and the Tribunal copied to him. The Tribunal did not accept as credible the Claimant's statement that ACAS had told him the case would be heard on 29 September.
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had not complied with its orders because he had not sent the Respondent his witness statement and had not disclosed any documents. It also recorded that the Respondent had sent its witness statements and bundle to the Claimant and attended the hearing with witnesses ready to proceed.
Applying rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the Tribunal decided that the Claimant had not provided a satisfactory or credible explanation for non-attendance, had not complied with tribunal orders, and that it was not in accordance with the overriding objective to adjourn and re-list the case. The claim was dismissed. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment dismisses the claim under rule 47 after the Claimant failed to attend and had not complied with tribunal orders. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded unfair dismissal issues. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under rule 47 after the Claimant failed to attend and had not complied with tribunal orders. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded race discrimination issues. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal's Rules of Procedure 2013
- overriding objective
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.