Case 2402544/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Matthew Gregory v Calder Industrial Materials Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2402544/2023
- Decision date
- 12 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin Attendance
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Matthew Gregory
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Matthew Gregory did not attend or participate in the remote hearing before Employment Judge Tobin on 30 August 2023, so the tribunal proceeded under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. The claimant’s claims of disability discrimination, victimisation, detriment for making a protected disclosure, automatic unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unlawful deduction of wages and breach of contract were dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023, and the tribunal recorded that it was not in the interests of justice to set that dismissal aside.
The tribunal struck out the remaining claims of health and safety detriment, detriment suffered for asserting a statutory right, and detriment on grounds related to trade union membership or activities, including blacklisting, under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success. The respondent’s application dated 30 June 2023 for reimbursement of legal costs succeeded to the extent that the claimant was ordered to pay a contribution of £1,750 plus VAT, and proceedings were then dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
10 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023; the tribunal said it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the dismissal. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023; the tribunal said it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment referred to this as detriment for making a protected disclosure; dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment referred to this as automatic unfair dismissal; dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023; the tribunal said it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed for non-compliance with the Unless Order of Employment Judge Whittaker dated 27 June 2023; the tribunal said it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the dismissal. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,750
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 47
- rule 38
- rule 37(1)(a)
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.