Case 1306084/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Dixon v Destiny Nursing & Social Care (Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1306084/2019
- Decision date
- 18 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Dixon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr G Dixon, brought proceedings against Destiny Nursing & Social Care (Creditors Voluntary Liquidation). The judgment does not determine any substantive employment claim on its merits. Instead, it records that the claim was struck out.
The tribunal had written to the claimant on 11 July 2022 and gave him an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
On that basis, Employment Judge Maxwell struck out the claim. No compensation or other remedy was awarded, and the judgment does not contain any findings on the underlying merits of the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant was given an opportunity by letter dated 11 July 2022 to make representations or request a hearing, but did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.