Case 2216712/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Rasheed Rakin v Beach Blanket Babylon — 2024
- Case reference
- 2216712/2023
- Decision date
- 25 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wisby
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Rasheed Rakin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim. By letter dated 20 August 2024, the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out under rule 37(1)(d) and/or dismissed under rule 47, because the claimant had failed without explanation to attend the hearing listed for 2 August 2024 at 14:00 and the claim appeared not to be actively pursued.
The claimant did not make representations or request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim on the grounds that the claimant failed without explanation to attend the 2 August 2024 hearing and that the claim had not been actively pursued. No substantive determination of the underlying wage claim or any remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not state any substantive merits findings. The tribunal referred to rule 37(1)(d) and/or rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend the hearing listed for 2 August 2024 and did not make representations or request a hearing in response to the tribunal's letter dated 20.08.24. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.
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.