Case 2203175/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Jones v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2203175/2020
- Decision date
- 4 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Havard Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was listed for a substantive hearing on 3 November 2022. The Claimant did not attend, and neither did his union representative, Mr Percival.
The Tribunal and the Respondent's solicitor emailed Mr Percival to ask about his and the Claimant's whereabouts, but there was no response. The Tribunal also tried to telephone both the Claimant and Mr Percival, but there was no answer.
In accordance with Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal dismissed the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states only that the Claimant's claim of unfair dismissal is dismissed under Rule 47 following non-attendance. Although the listing categories mention breach of contract and disability discrimination, those claims are not addressed in the supplied judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the ETs (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.