Case 2304960/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Alexander Chilvers v Cheema Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2304960/2021
- Decision date
- 30 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Wright
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Alexander Chilvers
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard on 30 March 2023 before Employment Judge D Wright sitting alone. The claimant did not attend, while the respondent was represented by counsel. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had failed to comply with the case management order of 2 November 2022 because he had not provided a witness statement.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was not actively pursuing the claim. It noted that he had not attended the last hearing, did not attend this hearing, and had failed to engage with the respondent or comply with case management orders. He had not contacted the tribunal to seek an extension of time or to explain his non-attendance.
The respondent's application to strike out the claim was allowed under Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 (as amended). The claim was struck out. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons were provided in the record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the underlying claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 (as amended)
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.