Case 3212878/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Hagger v Woodland Logistics Ltd. — 2021
- Case reference
- 3212878/2020
- Decision date
- 17 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Elgot Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Hagger
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr T Hagger, did not attend the hearing and was not represented. Woodland Logistics Ltd attended by representatives including its HR Manager, Head of Corporate Services and Operations Director. The hearing took place by telephone at East London Hearing Centre on 15 February 2021 before Employment Judge B Elgot.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant knew of the time and date of the hearing and had the dial-in details for the conference call. He was expecting his trade union representative to conduct the hearing for him and did not intend to participate personally. After a 10 minute adjournment he was given an opportunity to attend in person, but he did not attend and his trade union representative did not dial in.
Because there were disputes of fact between the parties, the Employment Judge said it was not possible to proceed with the hearing in the claimant's absence. The judgment therefore dismissed the claim in absence on 17 February 2021. No merits findings or monetary award were recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not state the substantive cause of action in the body of the text; the claim type is inferred from the case listing as unlawful deduction from wages. The claim was dismissed in the claimant's absence. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.