Case 6013676/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms H Trowbridge v Mr R Milroy — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013676/2025
- Decision date
- 31 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Russell Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms H Trowbridge
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing on 31 October 2025 and did not provide reasons for her non-attendance before the hearing was concluded. The Tribunal delayed the start, made enquiries by telephone and email, and permitted the Respondent to participate to answer questions about any reasons he knew for the Claimant's absence.
The Tribunal noted that this was the second hearing the Claimant had failed to attend, that she had been warned that non-attendance could result in dismissal, and that she had not complied with earlier case management orders. It concluded that the issues could not be determined in her absence and dismissed the claim under Rule 47.
After the hearing ended, the Tribunal became aware of an email from the Claimant saying she could not join. The Tribunal decided this did not alter the dismissal because it did not explain why she was not ready at 10am, why she did not contact the Tribunal before 10.39am, or why she had not actively pursued the claim or complied with prior orders.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. The listing category identifies age discrimination, but the judgment does not adjudicate the substantive merits. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. The listing category identifies unlawful deduction from wages, but the judgment does not adjudicate the substantive merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 because the Claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. The listing category identifies Working Time Regulations, but the judgment does not adjudicate the substantive merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- overriding objective
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.