Case 6008249/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Bayley v Quick Serv Limited HELD AT: Liverpool (by CVP) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008249/2024
- Decision date
- 7 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Bayley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented his ET1 on 11 August 2024 after ACAS early conciliation from 25 May 2024 to 6 July 2024. He said he had been employed from 11 January 2024 to 25 May 2024 and brought complaints about wages, notice pay, and holiday pay. The tribunal accepted the claim and sent a Notice of Claim to the respondent on 15 August 2024, but no response was filed in time. On 17 September 2024 the claimant asked for judgment, and the respondent later said the claim had first been served at the wrong address. The tribunal noted that the correct registered office was 96-106 Whitegate Drive, Blackpool, and that the proceedings were re-served there on 15 November 2024.
The final hearing took place on 1 April 2025 by CVP in Liverpool before Employment Judge Johnson. Both parties were aware of the hearing date, but neither attended and neither had provided documents in advance. The judge waited from 14:15 to 14:35 and received no explanation for non-attendance or late joining. Applying Rule 48 of the Employment Tribunals Rules 2024, the tribunal was satisfied that neither party was likely to attend the final hearing and dismissed the claim without further order. No merits findings were made and no monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed without further order under Rule 48 after neither party attended the final hearing; the judgment made no merits findings on the wages complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed without further order under Rule 48 after neither party attended the final hearing; the judgment made no merits findings on the notice pay complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed without further order under Rule 48 after neither party attended the final hearing; the judgment made no merits findings on the holiday pay complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 48 of the Employment Tribunals Rules 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.