Case 2404433/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Faye Dobson v Marks and Spencer plc — 2026
- Case reference
- 2404433/2025
- Decision date
- 1 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Faye Dobson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFaye Dobson did not attend the hearing on 1 June 2026. The Tribunal unsuccessfully attempted to contact her by telephone and email and noted that she had not responded to the respondent's email of 20 May 2025 concerning preparations for the hearing.
Employment Judge Benson struck out all claims under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 because of the claimant's non-attendance. The judgment did not separately identify the claims or determine their merits, and it recorded no monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment states that all claims were struck out but does not individually identify the claims; this classification reflects the gov.uk listing category. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that all claims were struck out but does not individually identify the claims; this classification reflects the gov.uk listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that all claims were struck out but does not individually identify the claims; this classification reflects the gov.uk listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
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.