Case 6016770/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Daniel Nixon v Wizz Air UK Limited HELD AT: Watford (by CVP) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016770/2024
- Decision date
- 15 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Daniel Nixon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 23 September 2025, held at Watford by CVP, Judge Cowx sat alone. The respondent was represented by Miss Sarah Britton, solicitor. The claimant did not attend. The Tribunal recorded that it had made telephone and email enquiries with the claimant, but he did not respond. The file showed that a Notice of Hearing had been sent on 14 June 2025, and that the claimant had not actively pursued the claims, including by failing to comply with case management orders dated 9 January 2025.
The Tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims under Rule 47 of the Tribunal Rules because of the claimant's non-attendance. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the judgment being sent. No monetary remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under Rule 47 following the claimant's non-attendance. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The judgment dismisses 'discrimination' generally under Rule 47; the specific protected characteristic is taken from the case listing rather than identified in the judgment. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment dismisses 'discrimination' generally under Rule 47; the specific protected characteristic is taken from the case listing rather than identified in the judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment dismisses 'discrimination' generally under Rule 47; the specific protected characteristic is taken from the case listing rather than identified in the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the 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.