Case 3306126/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend and was not represented For the v Trinity Estates Property Management Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3306126/2024
- Decision date
- 21 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Did not attend and was not represented For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe ET1, received on 22 June 2024, brought claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination on grounds of race, religion and disability. A preliminary hearing was listed for 6 March 2025, and the notice of hearing made case management directions for further particularisation of the discrimination complaints. The reasons record that the claimant did not attend that hearing and had not complied with the orders, and that the respondent applied to strike out the claim for lack of particulars.
The claimant was reminded to comply with the directions for further particulars and a disability impact statement by 27 March 2025, with a warning that non-compliance could lead to strike out. At the hearing on 21 August 2025, the claimant again did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim pursuant to Rule 47 on the grounds of non-attendance, and the reasons state that the claim was struck out under Rule 47 because of the claimant's non-attendance.
No merits findings were made on any of the pleaded claims and no remedy was awarded. The judgment is a procedural disposal only, based on the claimant's failure to attend and the earlier non-compliance recorded in the case management process.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The ET1 included unfair dismissal. The tribunal did not determine the merits; the claim was disposed of under Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend. The judgment header uses 'dismissed' and the reasons state the claim was 'struck out'. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The ET1 included race discrimination. The tribunal made no findings on the substance of the allegation and disposed of the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The ET1 included religion discrimination. The tribunal did not reach the merits and disposed of the claim under Rule 47 because the claimant did not attend. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Disability discrimination | The ET1 included disability discrimination. The tribunal did not determine the substance of the allegation and disposed of the claim under Rule 47 for non-attendance. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.