Case 3320868/2021 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance For the v Mr Lomax (S) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3320868/2021
- Decision date
- 19 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Talbot-Ponsonby Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No attendance For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Reading on 12 January 2023, before Employment Judge Talbot-Ponsonby, the claimant, Mr Richard Turney, did not attend the hearing. The respondent, Hallmark Connections Limited, appeared through Mr Lomax (S). The tribunal record also notes that the claimant had failed to comply with the tribunal's order dated 21 March 2022.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the claim was not being actively pursued and struck it out pursuant to Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The judgment does not contain any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claims.
No monetary award was made. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for failure to attend and failure to comply with the tribunal's order; the head of claim is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for failure to attend and failure to comply with the tribunal's order; the head of claim is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for failure to attend and failure to comply with the tribunal's order; the head of claim is taken from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
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.