Case 2207190/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Did not appear v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207190/2020
- Decision date
- 14 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heydon Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not appear
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 14 June 2022 at London Central, Employment Judge Heydon heard the case. The claimant did not appear. The respondent was represented by Mr M Curtis of counsel. The tribunal gave reasons orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were issued.
The tribunal found that the respondent was entitled under the claimant's contract of employment to dismiss him without notice. On that basis, it held that there was no obligation to pay notice pay. It also found that the claim for bonus pay or commission was not well founded and that the respondent had not made an unlawful deduction from wages.
The claim was dismissed in full. The tribunal also ordered the claimant to pay costs of £750 to the respondent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment addresses the claimant's entitlement to notice pay under the contract of employment, but it does not expressly use the phrase wrongful dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the claim for bonus pay or commission was not well founded and that no unlawful deduction from wages had been made. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £750
- across all upheld claims
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.