Case 2413171/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Ibrahim v Calisen Metering Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2413171/2023
- Decision date
- 22 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker Representatives
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Ibrahim
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place on 27 August 2024 at Manchester by CVP before Employment Judge Barker. The claimant did not attend. The tribunal clerk tried to contact him at the start of the hearing by telephone and email, but there was no response. The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant had received notice of the hearing, which had originally been listed for 27 June 2024 but was postponed because of a lack of judicial resources and relisted for 27 August 2024.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant had attended a case management hearing before Employment Judge Holmes on 21 May 2024, where case management orders were made requiring compliance by 18 June 2024. The claimant did not comply with those orders, and there had been no correspondence from him to the tribunal since that hearing. The respondent's solicitors had also tried on three occasions, on 4 July, 19 August and 20 August 2024, to agree the agenda and list of issues for the hearing, but there was no response.
The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to comply with case management orders and was not actively pursuing the claim. He had the opportunity to make representations at the hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out, but he did not attend. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Struck out under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 for non-attendance and failure to comply with case management orders; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Struck out under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 for non-attendance and failure to comply with case management orders; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 for non-attendance and failure to comply with case management orders; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the 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.
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.