Case 2404865/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Hughes (1) Mr E Hughes (2) v Beechpool Limited – Aoife Finnegan HELD AT: Liverpool — 2025
- Case reference
- 2404865/2024
- Decision date
- 17 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Hughes (1) Mr E Hughes (2)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for a final hearing on 17 December 2025 following a preliminary hearing case management hearing on 10 June 2025. Both claimants had attended the preliminary hearing, and the tribunal recorded that the parties had been sent notice of the final hearing date.
Neither claimant attended the final hearing, neither had contacted the tribunal to explain that they could not attend, and no other information had been found to explain their non-attendance. In accordance with Rule 47, Employment Judge Johnson dismissed the claims brought by both claimants.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment dismisses the first and second claimants' claims under Rule 47 after neither claimant attended the final hearing. The judgment does not set out claim particulars; this claim type is taken from the listed categories. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment dismisses the first and second claimants' claims under Rule 47 after neither claimant attended the final hearing. The judgment does not set out claim particulars; this claim type is taken from the listed categories. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.