Case 2408827/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Craig David Evans v The Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary — 2024
- Case reference
- 2408827/2021
- Decision date
- 3 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Childe REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Craig David Evans
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims against The Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary under case numbers 2408827/2021, 2407185/2022, 2405540/2023 and 2400365/2024. The listing category identifies the case as disability discrimination, but the judgment text does not describe the underlying allegations.
The tribunal dismissed the claims under Employment Tribunal rule 47 because the claimant did not attend and was not represented at the preliminary hearing on 3 July 2024 or the public preliminary hearing on 30 September 2024. No monetary award or remedy was made in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claimant's claims under rule 47 after non-attendance. The PDF text does not set out particulars of the disability discrimination allegations. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunal 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.