Case 2601828/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. M Adofo v Asda Stores Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2601828/2022
- Decision date
- 28 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. M Adofo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment dealt with the respondent's costs application after a preliminary hearing on 30 January 2023 was adjourned on the claimant's application. The tribunal recorded that the preliminary hearing had been listed to determine time-limit issues, but the claimant did not attend and no witness statement had been prepared despite earlier orders.
The tribunal found that the claimant and/or his representative had acted unreasonably in the conduct of the proceedings. It relied on failures to comply with earlier tribunal orders, the absence of a hearing bundle and witness statement from the claimant, the last-minute handling of representation, and the claimant's non-attendance without a reasonable explanation.
The claimant did not respond to the costs application or make representations about ability to pay. The tribunal ordered the claimant to pay the respondent £3,120 in costs thrown away by the adjourned preliminary hearing. It also recorded that the claimant had not complied with Unless Orders made on 30 January 2023, so the claim was dismissed in its entirety with effect from 14 February 2023 under Rule 38(1).
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment is a costs judgment and does not set out the underlying breach of contract allegations; it records that the claim was dismissed in its entirety following non-compliance with Unless Orders. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment is a costs judgment and does not set out the underlying race discrimination allegations; it records that the claim was dismissed in its entirety following non-compliance with Unless Orders. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment is a costs judgment and does not set out the underlying unfair dismissal allegations; it records that the claim was dismissed in its entirety following non-compliance with Unless Orders. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment is a costs judgment and does not set out the underlying working time allegations; it records that the claim was dismissed in its entirety following non-compliance with Unless Orders. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,120
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 76 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 84 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 38(1) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and 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.