Case 1305895/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305895/2020
- Decision date
- 11 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lloyd Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant's claims stood struck out in their entirety from 4.00pm on 5 May 2021 by operation of the Unless Order made on 21 April 2021. The order required the claimant to provide a detailed reply to the respondent's request for further information by that deadline, failing which the whole claim would be struck out without further order.
The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to provide the specific information reasonably required by the respondent to understand and respond to the claims. It declined to grant a further extension of time, concluding there was no fair basis to do so given the history of repeated requests and non-compliance.
The tribunal also awarded the respondent costs of £750. It found the claimant's conduct of the proceedings had been patently unreasonable, noted that she had been given a costs warning and invited to withdraw, and found she was reasonably able to pay that sum.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant advanced claims arising from disability, but the claims were struck out for non-compliance with an Unless Order rather than adjudicated on their merits. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment records claims arising from religion, but the claims were struck out for non-compliance with an Unless Order rather than adjudicated on their merits. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment refers to claims arising from past whistleblowing; they were struck out with the rest of the proceedings for non-compliance with an Unless Order. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment refers to alleged victimisation; it was struck out with the rest of the proceedings for non-compliance with an Unless Order. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £750
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 38 Employment Tribunal Rules
- Ijomah v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust UKEAT/0289/19/RN
- Rule 76(1) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
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.