Case 6003769/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ashton v Poppies Europe Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003769/2025
- Decision date
- 16 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Ashton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was listed as a case management hearing to clarify the claims, set a final hearing date, and make case management orders. The claimant did not attend. The tribunal waited until 2.35pm, the clerk telephoned him without success, and an email sent at 2.29pm was answered at 3.10pm saying he was having trouble with his phone and would not attend in person because his anxiety meant he could no longer use public transport.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not engaged with the claim since presenting it in February 2025. The respondent had tried to engage with him to prepare for the hearing, but he did not respond. The tribunal also noted that Employment Judge Shotter had written to him in March 2025 warning that his unfair dismissal claim may be struck out because he had less than two years' service, and he had not replied.
Because the claimant had not actively engaged in the claims and did not attend the hearing, the tribunal dismissed the claims. No substantive merits findings or monetary award were made in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the case management hearing and had not engaged with the proceedings. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the case management hearing and had not engaged with the proceedings. The tribunal noted an earlier warning that this claim may be struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the case management hearing and had not engaged with the proceedings. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.