Case 3303473/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Rebecca Asquith v Swans Day Nurseries Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3303473/2022
- Decision date
- 2 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Rebecca Asquith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was listed for a full merits hearing in Reading on 2 November 2022. The claimant, Miss Rebecca Asquith, did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal had written to the parties on 13 October 2022 asking the claimant to confirm whether she wished to continue with the case and whether she would attend the hearing, but there was no response from the claimant.
On 1 November 2022 the respondent was excused from attending because it was not clear whether the claimant wished to continue with the case, and the claimant had not complied with the tribunal's orders. The Employment Judge was satisfied that the claimant had failed to attend and that the claim was not being actively pursued. The judgment therefore dismissed the claim without determining the merits of any substantive allegations.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not separate the heads of claim. The case was dismissed because the claimant did not attend and the tribunal was satisfied the claim was not being actively pursued. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not separate the heads of claim. The case was dismissed because the claimant did not attend and the tribunal was satisfied the claim was not being actively pursued. | 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.