Case 6005766/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Tarek Kanane v Young & Co’s Brewery plc — 2026
- Case reference
- 6005766/2024
- Decision date
- 3 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs Balvinder Saund, Ms Julie Clark
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Tarek Kanane
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningTarek Kanane’s race and religious discrimination claims against Young & Co’s Brewery Plc were dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. Kanane did not attend the first day of the scheduled four-day final hearing; the respondent’s counsel attended. The tribunal attempted to contact Kanane by telephone and through two email addresses. It received no response despite warning that the case could be dismissed for non-attendance.
The most recent communication identified was dated 24 February 2026. Although Kanane had claimed compliance with the direction to exchange witness statements, the tribunal found that he had never exchanged his own statement. He had also failed to confirm by 23 June 2026 whether he was ready for the hearing or explain why he was not, as directed. The tribunal found that he had breached its orders and provided no good reason for his absence.
The tribunal decided that postponement would allocate a disproportionate share of its limited resources to the case at the expense of other tribunal users. It considered it unnecessary to hear the respondent’s evidence, noting that the respondent’s witness statements disputed Kanane’s factual allegations and that its witnesses were not due until the following day. Applying the Rule 3 overriding objective of dealing with cases fairly and justly, it dismissed the claims for non-attendance without deciding their substantive merits. No monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The tribunal did not determine the substantive discrimination allegations. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The tribunal did not determine the substantive discrimination allegations. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 47, Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Rule 3 overriding objective of dealing with cases fairly and justly
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.