Case 3311798/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Bristor v The Tipsy Vegan Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311798/2023
- Decision date
- 22 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss M Bristor
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing listed at Watford Employment Tribunal on 22 October 2025. The Tribunal office emailed the claimant to say that the hearing would pause and restart at 2:30 PM, but the claimant did not reply or attend at the later time.
The Tribunal dismissed the claims in accordance with Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024. The judgment states that the information available on the Tribunal file was insufficient for the Tribunal to determine the claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend and the Tribunal file contained insufficient information to determine the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the claims were dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend and the Tribunal file contained insufficient information to determine the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.