Case 6012553/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Gilmour v Optec Group Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012553/2024
- Decision date
- 13 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cowen Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Gilmour
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims including disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, unpaid annual leave, unpaid wages and breach of contract. At a preliminary hearing on 2 September 2025, the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and the claimant was allowed to amend to add race discrimination.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not complied with orders to provide details of the discrimination claims, a schedule of loss, an impact statement and medical evidence. The claimant did not attend the hearing on 13 November 2025 and had asked for a postponement the day before, referring to outstanding elements of the case and business commitments.
Employment Judge Cowen considered the request under rule 47 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 and dismissed the claims, referring to non-attendance, non-compliance and failure to engage with the respondent's reminders. The judgment also stated that, alternatively, the claims were struck out under rule 38 Tribunal Rules because the claimant had failed to comply with tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claim.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the disability discrimination claim was dismissed after the claimant did not attend and had not complied with orders to provide details, a schedule of loss, an impact statement and medical evidence. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant was allowed to amend to include race discrimination at a preliminary hearing on 2 September 2025; the judgment states that the race discrimination claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as a claim for unpaid annual leave and states that it was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for unpaid wages and states that it was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the breach of contract claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The reasons state that the unfair dismissal claim had been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction at a preliminary hearing on 2 September 2025. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 38 Tribunal Rules
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.