Case 2305605/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Williams v J & E Hall Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2305605/2021
- Decision date
- 5 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 5 December 2022 at London South by CVP, Employment Judge Wright heard the respondent’s application to strike out the claim. The claimant did not attend and had not sent written representations, despite the notice of hearing dated 9 August 2022.
The tribunal held that the respondent’s application succeeded under Rule 37(1)(a) because the claim had no reasonable prospect of success, and the claim was struck out. In the alternative, the tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 47. No remedy was awarded, and the written record states that reasons given orally at the hearing would not be provided in writing unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The written record does not identify the underlying claim type(s). The respondent’s application to strike out the claim succeeded under Rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success; in the alternative, the tribunal dismissed it under Rule 47. The claimant did not attend the hearing or send written representations despite notice dated 9 August 2022. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(a)
- Rule 47
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.