Case 2400065/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Mohammadi v PJ Bury Ltd KA Empire Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400065/2023
- Decision date
- 22 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Mohammadi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for hearing on 11 May 2023 before Judge Callan sitting alone. Neither party attended, and the Claimant did not ask for a postponement. The Tribunal recorded that notice of the hearing had been sent to the Claimant’s address on her application form and that she was contacted by telephone on the morning of the hearing, but ended the call after identifying herself when the clerk said she was calling from the Tribunal.
The Respondents had not entered Notices of Appearance. The Tribunal noted that the claims would otherwise have been considered under Rule 21, but concluded it was not appropriate to proceed in the Claimant’s absence because there was very little information available about the claims.
Applying Rule 47 of the Tribunal Rules and the overriding objective in Rule 2, the Tribunal struck out all of the Claimant’s claims in their entirety for non-attendance. No findings were made on the substance of the underlying breach of contract, redundancy, unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions, or working time claims, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | All claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | All claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | All claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | All claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | All claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 47
- Rule 2 overriding objective
- Rule 21
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.