Case 3311676/2023 · Employment Tribunal
No Attendance For the v Ms S Akhtar (Litigation Executive - Peninsula) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311676/2023
- Decision date
- 11 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No Attendance For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought complaints of sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, and unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal had previously directed the claimant to provide details of the alleged sex-related harassment and to produce a schedule of loss, but the claimant did not provide the requested information.
The respondent chased the claimant several times, and the tribunal noted that the claimant's last contact with it had been in June 2024. The hearing notice was sent, the time of hearing was changed and notified to the parties, and on the day of the hearing the clerk emailed the claimant again. The hearing was delayed to allow time for attendance, but there was no communication from the claimant.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claims under Rule 47. The judgment records no substantive findings on the merits of the discrimination, harassment, or wages complaints.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend; the judgment makes no merits findings on this claim. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend; the judgment makes no merits findings on this claim. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend; the judgment makes no merits findings on this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47
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.