Case 6012414/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Adam Pearce v Ministry of Defence — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012414/2024
- Decision date
- 5 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Salter Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Adam Pearce
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Bristol Employment Tribunal by CVP audio on 17 July 2025 before Employment Judge Salter. The claimant, Adam Pearce, did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, the Ministry of Defence, was represented by Ms L. Price, counsel.
Pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, the tribunal dismissed the proceedings following the claimant's non-attendance and the absence of any representation for him. The written record does not record any findings on the merits of the underlying claims.
The judgment is therefore a procedural dismissal only. It does not contain any substantive decision on unfair dismissal, whistleblowing, working time, or any other pleaded complaint, and it records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal dismissed the proceedings pursuant to r47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 after the claimant did not attend and had no representation. No merits determination of any pleaded claim was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- r47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.