Miss S Gittens v Sophia Wright/Cuba Gooden — 2022

At a public preliminary hearing on 9 February 2023, Employment Judge Noons considered why the claimant had not complied with a series of tribunal orders and why the claim should not be struck out. The judgment records that the claimant’s ET1 referred to Sophia Wright/Cuba Gooden as respondents and described the claim as one for arrears of pay.

The tribunal found repeated non-compliance with directions about identifying the correct respondent and providing an ACAS early conciliation certificate for that respondent. The claimant was asked on several occasions to clarify whether she was employed personally by Sophia Wright and Cuba Gooden or by TwoTwos Publishing Ltd, but she did not provide the information requested in the relevant orders. Although she later said she was personally employed by Sophia Wright, she did not provide an ACAS certificate naming Sophia Wright or Cuba Gooden as prospective respondents.

The claimant also failed to respond to later correspondence and did not attend the hearing. The tribunal held that she had not complied with multiple tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claim. It therefore struck out the claim under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment also noted that the claim appeared not to comply with Rule 10 because there was no ACAS early conciliation number for the respondents named in the claim.