Case 6010409/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend and was not represented For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6010409/2024
- Decision date
- 29 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown Appearances
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not attend and was not represented For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public preliminary hearing on 23 January 2025, Employment Judge Brown struck out the claimant’s complaints of unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, and race discrimination. The tribunal stated that each complaint had no reasonable prospects of success.
The judgment records that the claim was struck out in its entirety and that there would be no final hearing. The claimant did not attend and was not represented; the respondent was represented by counsel.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out at a public preliminary hearing because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out at a public preliminary hearing because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Struck out at a public preliminary hearing because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.