Case 3310774/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend nor represented For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3310774/2022
- Decision date
- 3 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not attend nor represented For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing in Watford on 3 March 2023, before Employment Judge Bedeau, the claimant did not attend and was not represented. The respondent was represented by Ms L Whittington, Counsel. The tribunal recorded that more than five and a half years had passed since termination of the claimant's employment.
The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to extend time because, in the claimant's absence, he had not demonstrated that it would be just and equitable to do so. On that basis, all claims were struck out. The tribunal added, in the alternative, that the claims were dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) 2013 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing to put forward his case, despite having been engaged in the preparation of the bundle and being told by the tribunal clerk that he was required to attend.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to extend time beyond five and a half years after termination because the claimant was absent and did not show it was just and equitable to do so. It also said the claim was alternatively dismissed under rule 47 for non-attendance. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to extend time beyond five and a half years after termination because the claimant was absent and did not show it was just and equitable to do so. It also said the claim was alternatively dismissed under rule 47 for non-attendance. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable
- rule 47 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and 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.