Case 1309604/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Rynesova v Homes2Inspire — 2023
- Case reference
- 1309604/2020
- Decision date
- 14 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Rynesova
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 17 March 2021, the tribunal gave Miss K Rynesova an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that she had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 17 December 2020 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No merits findings or remedy were recorded in the judgment, which was signed by Employment Judge Dimbylow on 14 July 2023.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not set out the underlying merits of the claim. It records that by letter dated 17 March 2021 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on strike out because she had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 17 December 2020 and had not actively pursued the case. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not set out the underlying merits of the claim. It records that by letter dated 17 March 2021 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on strike out because she had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 17 December 2020 and had not actively pursued the case. | 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.