Case 2408718/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Balal Ahmad v Credit Counsellor Ltd HELD AT: Manchester (remote) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2408718/2023
- Decision date
- 13 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kathryn Gibson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Balal Ahmad
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Kathryn Gibson sat alone at Manchester (remote) on 3 June 2024. The claimant, Mr Balal Ahmad, did not attend and the respondent, Credit Counsellor Ltd, attended in person. The judgment records that the claim was struck out.
The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 37(c) and (d) and Rule 47. The reasons given were that the claimant had failed to comply with Orders of the Tribunal, the claim was no longer being actively pursued, and the claimant failed to attend the hearing.
No substantive findings on liability or remedy were made. The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type; it records that 'the claim' was struck out under Rule 37(c) and (d) and Rule 47 because the claimant failed to comply with Tribunal orders, was no longer actively pursuing the claim, and failed to attend the hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37(c)
- Rule 37(d)
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.