Case 3301598/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Amanda Crowe v Norse Group Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3301598/2024
- Decision date
- 18 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Amanda Crowe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAmanda Crowe brought claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and other payments against Norse Group Ltd. The respondent filed a defence denying the complaints. The tribunal recorded that the claimant did not attend the private preliminary hearing on 10 September 2024, had not contacted the tribunal, and had not responded to correspondence about the change of respondent name, the case management agenda, or the direction to provide details of remedy sought.
The tribunal also noted the respondent's account that it had applied for strike out on 11 July 2024 because of breach of directions and failure actively to pursue the claim, although that application was not before the judge at the hearing. Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the judge concluded that nothing had been received from the claimant since the claim was brought and that she had been aware of the hearing but chosen not to take part.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim in full under Rule 47. It was unnecessary to consider the respondent's Rule 37 strike-out application, and no costs application was made at the hearing. The final hearing was cancelled. The written record of the decision was sent to the parties on 18 November 2024.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend the hearing; the tribunal did not reach the merits of the unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend and made no contact with the tribunal; the tribunal did not determine the discrimination allegations on their merits. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | The ET1 referred to 'other payments', but the judgment does not particularise the legal basis or amount of any such claim; it was dismissed in full with the rest of the case. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 Employment Tribunal 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.