Case 3302476/2024 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance For the v R and J Lubbock Builders — 2024
- Case reference
- 3302476/2024
- Decision date
- 11 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No attendance For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis matter was listed for a two-day full merits hearing on 8 August 2024 at Bury St Edmunds, but neither party attended. The claimant told the tribunal administration that he had not known about the hearing until he received the email about the late change of venue from Norwich to Bury St Edmunds, and asked for a postponement. The tribunal noted that the notice of hearing and case management orders had been sent on 14 May 2024 to the same email address that the claimant used when contacting the tribunal the previous day, and it did not accept his account in the absence of further evidence.
The tribunal also recorded that the respondent had previously been represented by the Kroner Group, who emailed on 25 July 2024 saying they were no longer instructed and did not provide a new contact address. The tribunal administration later obtained an email address for the respondent and sent the venue-change notification there, but the respondent did not attend. Applying Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the judge found that the claimant had not actively pursued the claim and struck out the claim(s), adding that the claimant could apply for reconsideration if he produced further evidence that he had not known about the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment says the claimant pursued a claim for unfair dismissal; no merits decision was made because the claim was struck out for failure to prosecute. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The judgment also refers generally to 'other payments' but does not identify or separately determine the underlying head(s) of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- failure to prosecute
- not actively pursued
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.