Case 1300098/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Messi v Hydrafacial UK Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1300098/2023
- Decision date
- 30 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Messi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in public on 29 August 2024, Employment Judge Perry struck out the claimant’s claim against Hydrafacial UK Limited. The judgment states that the claim was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it was scandalous or vexatious.
In the alternative, the tribunal held that the claim would also be struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success, and further in the alternative under Rule 37(1)(b) because the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted was scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious. The judgment does not set out any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claim.
The tribunal also recorded that it had issued a directions order in relation to the respondent’s costs application, and that day 2 of the hearing, listed for 30 August 2024, was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the claimant’s claim was struck out under Rule 37(1)(a), alternatively under Rule 37(1)(b). The substantive claim types are not specified in the judgment text provided. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a)
- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b)
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.