Case 2300063/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Fidalgo v London United Busways Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300063/2020
- Decision date
- 20 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Fidalgo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal entered judgment in the claimant's favour under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent had failed to present a response within the time limit set out in Rule 16.
The judgment records that the respondent remains entitled to notice of hearings and decisions, but unless and until an extension of time is granted, may participate in any hearing only to the extent permitted by the Judge. The judgment does not set out findings on the merits of the underlying claims or make any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment is a Rule 21 judgment entered in the claimant's favour after no response was presented in time. The judgment text does not separately identify or reason this claim; classification follows the case listing category. | Upheld | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment is a Rule 21 judgment entered in the claimant's favour after no response was presented in time. The judgment text does not separately identify or reason this claim; classification follows the case listing category. | Upheld | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
- Rule 16
- Rule 21(3)
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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.