Case 3300266/2022 · Employment Tribunal
No Attendance For the v Mr G Redmayne, Managing Director — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300266/2022
- Decision date
- 3 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No Attendance For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place by CVP at Watford on 3 August 2022 before Employment Judge G D Davison. The claimant did not attend. The respondent was represented by Mr G Redmayne, Managing Director.
The tribunal recorded that the initial notice of hearing was sent on 23 April 2022 and that relevant documents were emailed to the claimant on 3 June 2022, but there was no response. On the hearing date the tribunal also attempted to call the claimant and again received no response. The claimant had not informed the tribunal that she was unable or unwilling to participate.
Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, the judge dismissed the claims for notice pay and arrears of wages. The judgment states that all claims against the respondent were dismissed under Rule 47.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend and did not respond to the tribunal's communications. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of wages claim dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend and did not respond to the tribunal's communications. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 47
- Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1
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.