Case 2401566/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Whittingham v Smooth Gym Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401566/2019
- Decision date
- 10 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hoey Representatives
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Whittingham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs J Whittingham and Smooth Gym Limited did not attend the hearing on 12 December 2019 and neither was represented. Employment Judge Hoey recorded that the Tribunal was satisfied both parties had received notice of the hearing and that reasonable enquiries had been made to find out why they were absent. The Judge also noted that the hearing had previously been fixed for 14 October 2019, but was postponed because the Tribunal office had been flooded and it was not clear that the parties had been informed of that date.
The Tribunal waited for around 30 minutes before deciding the case. Applying rule 47, the Judge concluded that where a party fails to attend the Tribunal may dismiss the claim, and after considering all the information available and the results of the enquiries made, decided that it was just for the claims to be dismissed. The written reasons do not contain any findings on the substance of the underlying claims.
The Judge noted that if either party had reasons for the absence and considered it to be in the interests of justice, an application for reconsideration could be made under rules 70 to 72, supported by evidence and reasons, subject to the relevant time limits.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed under rule 47 for non-attendance; the written judgment does not set out any merits findings on this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Dismissed under rule 47 for non-attendance; the written judgment does not set out any merits findings on this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- rules 70 to 72 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.