Case 6026620/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms O Norman v Flour and Spoon Ltd FINAL HEARING Heard: East London Tribunal Hearing Centre — 2025
- Case reference
- 6026620/2025
- Decision date
- 8 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Shore Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms O Norman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal amended the respondent's name to Flour and Spoon Ltd.
After considering the information available to it, the Tribunal struck out all of the claimant's claims under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing. The judgment records that neither party appeared and gives no written reasons beyond the short judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states all the claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing. The short written judgment does not set out further particulars of this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states all the claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing. The short written judgment does not set out further particulars of this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states all the claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing. The short written judgment does not set out further particulars of this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 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.