Case 2420092/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Choudhury v Umbrella-Company Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2420092/2020
- Decision date
- 28 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms S Howarth, Ms H Sheard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Y Choudhury
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Y Choudhury's case was heard at Manchester on 19 June 2023 before Employment Judge Phil Allen, with Ms S Howarth and Ms H Sheard sitting as members. The claimant did not attend and was not represented. The respondent attended through Ms McGrath, consultant.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims on non-attendance under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The judgment therefore contains no substantive findings on the underlying claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Dismissed on non-attendance at the hearing under rule 47; merits were not determined. Claim type inferred from the supplied case listing categories, not expressly set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed on non-attendance at the hearing under rule 47; merits were not determined. Claim type inferred from the supplied case listing categories, not expressly set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed on non-attendance at the hearing under rule 47; merits were not determined. Claim type inferred from the supplied case listing categories, not expressly set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on non-attendance at the hearing under rule 47; merits were not determined. Claim type inferred from the supplied case listing categories, not expressly set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on non-attendance at the hearing under rule 47; merits were not determined. Claim type inferred from the supplied case listing categories, not expressly set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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.