Case 6003007/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C. Ellis v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003007/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Goodman Representation
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr C. Ellis
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 29 May 2024, Mr C. Ellis presented claims to the employment tribunal. The judgment states that he said he had been unfairly dismissed because of age, race and disability, and that he had been employed since 2001 with a termination date of 31 May 2024.
There was a case management hearing before Employment Judge Nicklin on 10 October 2024. Mr Ellis did not attend. The tribunal listed a final hearing and warned him in the written order that if he did not communicate with the tribunal there was a risk that his claim might be struck out; he was ordered to write about his non-attendance and to comment on the draft list of issues. The respondent filed a bundle and wrote to him explaining the orders and the draft list of issues.
Mr Ellis did not reply to the respondent or the tribunal and did not attend the hearing on 6 January 2025. The tribunal had an email address for him but no telephone number. Employment Judge Goodman concluded that the claims were not actively pursued and dismissed them under rule 38(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. The judgment contains no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Presented on 29 May 2024 and dismissed under rule 38(d) because the claimant did not attend, did not reply to the tribunal, and was not actively pursuing the claim. The judgment makes no merits finding. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant said he had been unfairly dismissed because of age. The claim was dismissed under rule 38(d) for non-pursuit, without any merits findings. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant said he had been unfairly dismissed because of race. The claim was dismissed under rule 38(d) for non-pursuit, without any merits findings. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant said he had been unfairly dismissed because of disability. The claim was dismissed under rule 38(d) for non-pursuit, without any merits findings. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
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.