Case 2502439/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Proudlock v Mr Bakers — 2023
- Case reference
- 2502439/2022
- Decision date
- 16 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moss REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Proudlock
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant’s claims were for unpaid wages, holiday pay and notice pay. At the hearing in Newcastle on 9 March 2023 before Employment Judge Moss, neither party was present. Tribunal administration telephoned the claimant shortly after 10.00 am, but the call went unanswered and a voicemail was left. The matter was stood down until 10.30 am, but there was still no contact from the claimant and she had not requested a postponement.
The tribunal also noted that it had written to the claimant on 16 February 2023 asking her to provide the full and correct name of her former employer within 14 days, because she appeared to have given only a trading name. She did not respond. Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the tribunal inferred that she was not actively pursuing the claims and considered dismissal to be proportionate and justified in the circumstances. The claims were therefore dismissed without any determination on the underlying merits.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend the hearing and made no contact or postponement request; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend the hearing and made no contact or postponement request; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | This covered the notice pay claim and was dismissed pursuant to Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend the hearing and made no contact or postponement request; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 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.