Case 6019999/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S King v Leonard Buca Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6019999/2024
- Decision date
- 12 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Emery Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S King
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the hearing on 22 July 2025 was listed to clarify the claims and for further case management if appropriate. The claimant had previously been asked to provide evidence of financial losses, payslips and a contract of employment, and later to send a schedule of loss, agree a bundle and exchange statements, but those steps were not taken.
The Tribunal clerk attempted to contact the claimant on 22 July 2025 after a judge became available, and the Tribunal checked its inboxes for any reason for his absence. In the absence of evidence of a good reason for non-attendance, and noting the claimant had not responded to attempts to contact him, the Tribunal dismissed all claims under Rule 47.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states all claims were dismissed under Rule 47 following the claimant's non-attendance and lack of contact. The listing category identifies the claim as unlawful deduction from wages; the judgment does not further clarify the pleaded claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Roberts v Skelmersdale College [2003] EWCA Civ. 954
- Cooke v Glenrose Fish Co Ltd [2004] IRLR 866, EAT
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.