Case 6002174/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Motala v Ministry of Justice/HMCTS — 2024
- Case reference
- 6002174/2023
- Decision date
- 5 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Y Motala
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Y Motala did not attend the hearing at Leicester on 28 August 2024. Employment Judge Adkinson recorded that the tribunal made reasonable enquiries of the claimant, but the claimant did not provide a reason for non-attendance that was found credible or sufficient to justify postponement. The tribunal therefore decided to proceed in the claimant’s absence and heard from counsel for the respondent, Ministry of Justice/HMCTS.
The tribunal then struck out the claimant’s claims for constructive unfair dismissal. The reason given was that the claims had no reasonable prospects of success and that there was no other reason for them to be heard. No remaining complaints were left before the tribunal, and any future hearings that may have been listed were vacated. The written record notes that the judgment was sent to the parties on 5 September 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes the claim as one for constructive unfair dismissal. It was struck out because it had no reasonable prospects of success and there was no other reason for it to be heard. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.