Case 2502478/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Harland v Intelligent Steel — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502478/2023
- Decision date
- 13 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Harland
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard remotely by CVP at Newcastle CFCTC on 13 March 2024 before Employment Judge Arullendran. The claimant, Mr K Harland, did not attend. The respondent, Intelligent Steel, was represented by its managing director, Mr Kashif Usmani.
The tribunal recorded that all of the claimant's claims were dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 because he failed to attend the hearing. The written record states that the claims were not determined on their merits.
No written reasons were provided with the judgment, and the record does not set out any findings on the substantive allegations or any remedy awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 for failing to attend the hearing; the judgment does not determine the claim on its merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed under Rule 47 for failing to attend the hearing; the judgment does not determine the claim on its merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.