Case 3202875/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Zhang v CareerVantageUK Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3202875/2022
- Decision date
- 23 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Lewis Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs G Forrest, Mrs B K Saund
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Zhang
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for final hearing following a preliminary hearing on 28 September 2022. The tribunal recorded that the respondent's last solicitors came off the record on 5 December 2023 after the respondent had gone into creditors' voluntary liquidation, with liquidators appointed on that date. The tribunal wrote to the insolvency practitioner on 22 December 2023 asking whether it intended to attend and advance the case, but no response was received.
At the hearing on 23 January 2024, neither party attended and neither had asked for a postponement or explained the absence. The employment judge's clerk attempted to contact the parties by email and telephone between 9.05 a.m. and 10.30 a.m. without success.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the case under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No findings on the substance of the whistleblowing or unfair dismissal claims, and no monetary remedy, were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after neither party attended the final hearing; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after neither party attended the final hearing; 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.