Case 3212970/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Ionel Stefan v Meads Construction Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3212970/2020
- Decision date
- 26 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Ionel Stefan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place remotely by Cloud Video Platform on 26 April 2021 before Employment Judge Tobin sitting alone at the East London Hearing Centre. Neither the claimant nor the respondent attended or participated. The judgment records that a face-to-face hearing was not held because the matters could be determined remotely.
The tribunal noted that the claimant in the linked cases had lost contact with the claimant, did not know his contact details, and that the claimant had not complied with orders made by Employment Judge Lewis on 1 March 2021. In those circumstances, the claimant's claims were struck out pursuant to Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after no attendance or participation and non-compliance with orders dated 1 March 2021. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | Struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after no attendance or participation and non-compliance with orders dated 1 March 2021. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after no attendance or participation and non-compliance with orders dated 1 March 2021. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rules 37(1)(c) and 37(1)(d) 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.