Case 2300770/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Z Dzhavatkhanova v Patel Post and Print Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300770/2021
- Decision date
- 10 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Z Dzhavatkhanova
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe matter was listed for a one day open preliminary hearing on 10 October 2022 to consider the claimant's amendment application, time limits, possible strike out, a possible deposit order, and directions for the final hearing.
The claimant did not attend. The Tribunal contacted her former legal representative, tried to contact the claimant multiple times by phone and email, and noted that no medical evidence, postponement request, or explanation for non-attendance had been provided.
Having regard to Rule 2, the Tribunal dismissed the claim under Schedule 1, Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules for non-attendance. The final hearing listed for 9 to 13 January 2023 was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
12 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The judgment does not set out the pleaded facts or adjudicate the merits of this specific claim type. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Schedule 1, Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 2 of the Tribunal Rules
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the .
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.