Case 3304606/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3304606/2024
- Decision date
- 18 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not attend For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought claims of unfair dismissal, race discrimination, disability discrimination, and deductions of payments after employment that the parties agreed had ended by dismissal on 29 August 2006. The Tribunal recorded that the deductions claim had not been clarified, and that the Claimant had not provided the ordered information needed to identify the disability relied upon.
The Claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing on 18 December 2025 despite notice of it, and did not provide reasons for non-attendance when asked on the day. The Tribunal found that she had not complied with Tribunal orders or the Respondent's request for further information, that the way the proceedings had been conducted was unreasonable, and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The Tribunal also found the claim was significantly out of time and that there was no evidence explaining why it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. It did not strike out on the basis of earlier proceedings because it did not have the previous decisions before it.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out under Rules 47 and 38, and the Tribunal also found it was significantly out of time with no jurisdiction to determine it. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The claim was struck out under Rules 47 and 38, and the Tribunal also found it was significantly out of time with no jurisdiction to determine it. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim was struck out under Rules 47 and 38. The Claimant had not provided all ordered information identifying which medical condition was relied upon as a disability under the Equality Act 2010. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Claimant described this as deductions of payments, but the judgment records that it was not further clarified. The claim was struck out with the other claims. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 47 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Rule 38 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
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.