Case 2415347/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Bell v Machfab Engineering Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415347/2020
- Decision date
- 22 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Bell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr M Bell, did not attend a telephone case management hearing on 22 February 2021 before Employment Judge Humble. Judge Humble directed that the claimant write to the Tribunal within 14 days of the order being sent on 6 March 2021 to explain fully why he had not attended, but he did not do so.
The hearing was relisted for 19 April 2021 and a separate notice of hearing was sent to the claimant by email and to his postal address. He was warned that if he did not attend on 19 April 2021 and did not provide a good reason for his non-attendance on 22 February 2021, his claim risked being struck out for not being actively pursued. He did not make written representations, did not attend the relisted hearing, and gave no explanation for his absence. Employment Judge Ross therefore held that the claim was not being actively pursued and struck it out. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the underlying heads of claim. It disposes of 'the claim' generally, on the basis that it was not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.