Case 6002672/2023 · Employment Tribunal
M C Donachie v Maximus UK Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 6002672/2023
- Decision date
- 29 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M C Donachie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented claims for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal on 14 December 2023. The tribunal sent notice of a hearing listed for 29 April 2024 and later issued a strike out warning about the unfair dismissal claim, as well as a request for further information about the claim.
On the morning of the hearing, the claimant emailed the tribunal stating that he had assumed the case had been dismissed and would not attend. The tribunal replied that the claim had not been dismissed, that he should attend if he wanted the case to continue, and that failure to attend could result in dismissal. The claimant did not attend, the clerk was unable to contact him by phone, and the respondent said it had had no communication from him since March 2024.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant did not intend to proceed and was not actively pursuing the claim. It considered dismissal under rule 37(1)(d), but decided that rule 47 was the most appropriate basis because the claimant had failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. The claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant presented a claim for disability discrimination. The claim was dismissed under rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant presented a claim for unfair dismissal. The tribunal had warned the claimant that he appeared to have insufficient service, but the final dismissal was under rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.