Case 2203445/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Did not participate and was not represented For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2203445/2020
- Decision date
- 8 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A James Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not participate and was not represented For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFollowing submissions from counsel for the respondent and in the claimant's absence, Employment Judge A James recorded that the claimant had failed to participate in the hearing. The tribunal considered the respondent's bundle and changed the respondent's name to John Lewis plc.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims because he had failed to comply with case management orders made on 27 July 2020 and/or because the claim had not been actively pursued. The judgment cites Rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 as the basis for strike out.
The tribunal also made a costs order requiring the claimant to pay the respondent £750 for counsel's fees for attending the hearing within 28 days. The reasons given were that the claimant had conducted the proceedings unreasonably by failing to participate, by failing to withdraw the claim after indicating an intention to do so, and/or by failing to comply with case management orders. VAT was not allowed on the fee note, with the judgment referring to Raggett v John Lewis plc [2012] IRLR 906.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims for failure to comply with case management orders dated 27 July 2020 and/or because the claim had not been actively pursued under Rule 37(1)(c) and (d). The judgment does not separate outcomes by individual claim, but the listed case categories included unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims for failure to comply with case management orders dated 27 July 2020 and/or because the claim had not been actively pursued under Rule 37(1)(c) and (d). The judgment does not separate outcomes by individual claim, but the listed case categories included unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £750
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37(1)(c) and (d) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 76(1)(a) and (2) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Raggett v John Lewis plc [2012] IRLR 906
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.