Case 3200810/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Jesse Middleweek v ThorntonRones Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200810/2023
- Decision date
- 4 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sugarman Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jesse Middleweek
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a claim for unlawful deductions from wages concerning money said to have been deducted from his final pay packet following termination of employment on 18 January 2023. He had been ordered to provide a document setting out the amount claimed and how it was calculated, together with supporting documents and evidence, but did not comply.
The claimant did not attend the hearing on 23 February 2024 and did not respond to attempts to contact him by phone and email. The Tribunal considered the available information, including the claim form, response, and the respondent's witness statement and exhibits, and concluded it was not possible fairly to proceed in the claimant's absence because evidence was required to prove the claim.
The Tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 47. It also stated that, had it not dismissed the claim under Rule 47, it would have struck it out under Rule 37 because the claimant had failed to comply with Tribunal orders and was not actively pursuing the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the full merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 47, Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Roberts v Skelmersdale College [2004] IRLR 69
- Rule 37
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.