Case 3200174/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Paul v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200174/2020
- Decision date
- 29 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reid Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Paul
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant did not attend the telephone hearing on 29 July 2020. The Tribunal delayed the start by 10 minutes, checked for any application or explanation, and proceeded in his absence under Rule 47 of the Tribunal Rules 2013. The Claimant had also not attended the previous hearing on 19 May 2020.
The Respondent applied to strike out the claims for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and/or failure actively to pursue them. The Tribunal found that the Claimant had not responded to the Tribunal's letter of 9 July 2020, had not complied with orders made on 19 May 2020, had not contacted the Tribunal after presenting his claim, and had not replied to correspondence from the Respondent's solicitors.
Applying the guidance in Evans v Commissioner of Police and Rolls Royce v Riddle, the Tribunal found the lack of pursuit was intentional, that no reason had been given for delay or non-compliance, and that there was a substantial risk a fair hearing would not be possible. The claims for unfair dismissal, holiday pay and unpaid wages were all struck out under Rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 37(1)(d) of the Tribunal Rules 2013 because the Claimant had not actively pursued the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Struck out under Rule 37(1)(d) of the Tribunal Rules 2013 because the Claimant had not actively pursued the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for unpaid wages. It was struck out under Rule 37(1)(d) because the Claimant had not actively pursued the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 47 of the Tribunal Rules 2013
- Rule 37(1)(d) of the Tribunal Rules 2013
- Evans v Commissioner of Police 1993 ICR 151
- Rolls Royce v Riddle 2008 IRLR 873
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.