Case 2411279/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Parkin v Madison Medical Professionals Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2411279/2019
- Decision date
- 4 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rice-Birchall REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Parkin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a hearing at Manchester on 26 August 2020 before Employment Judge Rice-Birchall. The claimant, Mr D Parkin, did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, Madison Medical Professionals Limited, was represented by Mr Weatherilt, Director.
The judgment states that, under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the claimant's claim was dismissed because of the claimant's failure to attend or be represented at the hearing. The decision does not set out any substantive findings on the underlying employment claims.
The written record also notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's standard procedure. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the substantive claim type; it states only that the claimant's claim was dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.