Case 6000355/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Gordon Smart v Ground Works Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000355/2024
- Decision date
- 3 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Gordon Smart
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Bristol by CVP audio on 27 June 2025 before Employment Judge Midgley. The claimant, Mr Gordon Smart, did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, Ground Works Ltd, was represented by Mr Stuart Seagrove, solicitor.
The tribunal struck out the claims pursuant to rules 47 and 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules because of the claimant’s non-attendance at the hearing and his failure to comply with case management orders. The judgment states that the relevant circumstances are detailed in the case management order of the same date.
The tribunal gave reasons orally at the hearing. The written record notes that no written reasons will be provided unless a request was made at the hearing or a written request is presented within 14 days of the sending of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment struck out the claims collectively under rules 47 and 38 because the claimant did not attend the hearing and had failed to comply with case management orders. The written reasons do not restate individual heads of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rules 47 and 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.