Case 2204105/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Yarid v Caffe Concerto Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2204105/2021
- Decision date
- 22 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Emery Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H Yarid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 24 August 2022, the respondent applied for the claims to be struck out under rule 37 on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success or were not being actively pursued. The claimant did not attend. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had previously been represented, that his solicitor came off the record on 26 July 2022 after saying they had not heard from him, and that the respondent had written to the claimant twice, including sending the hearing bundle and asking for disclosure of relevant documents.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been given notice by the tribunal's 22 June 2022 order and by the respondent's emails that the claims might be struck out if he did not actively pursue them. It also found that he had failed to make written submissions, failed to attend the hearings, and failed to give reasons for not attending. The judgment therefore struck out the claim under rule 37. No merits findings were made on the underlying breach of contract, race discrimination, or working time claims, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Underlying claim type reflected from the case listing supplied in context; the judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out under rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Underlying claim type reflected from the case listing supplied in context; the judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out under rule 37. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Working time regulations | Underlying claim type reflected from the case listing supplied in context; the judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out under rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37
- no reasonable prospects of success
- not being actively pursued
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.