Case 4104997/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Graham Murray v No appearance and No representation Hiflow — 2021
- Case reference
- 4104997/2020
- Decision date
- 11 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rory McPherson
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Graham Murray
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Graham Murray presented a claim on 22 September 2020 for arrears of pay, including unpaid holiday pay. No ET3 was presented. The Tribunal issued correspondence dated 7 January 2021 fixing a telephone preliminary hearing for 29 January 2021 to clarify the basis of the holiday claims and requiring the claimant to provide a telephone number for the hearing.
The claimant did not attend the hearing. After identifying that the claimant was absent, the Tribunal clerk telephoned the mobile number provided in the ET1 but did not obtain a response. The Tribunal had no information about the reason for the claimant’s absence and no information suggesting that any disputed payment remained outstanding.
Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, the Tribunal concluded that the claimant did not insist upon his claim and dismissed it, including the holiday pay element and any other arrears of pay. The judgment noted that the claimant could seek reconsideration under Rules 70 and 71 within 14 days if a proper explanation for non-attendance were provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment refers to a claim for arrears of pay including unpaid holiday pay. It did not break the matter into separate merits findings or identify a separate award; the whole claim was dismissed under Rule 47 after the claimant did not attend. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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.