Case 1401073/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Trerise v The Beehive Inn — 2019
- Case reference
- 1401073/2019
- Decision date
- 21 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E Trerise
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 21 June 2019, Employment Judge Roper struck out the respondent's response in Miss E Trerise v The Beehive Inn. The Tribunal recorded that, by a letter dated 11 June 2019, the respondent had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the response should not be struck out because it had not complied with the Tribunal's letter of 10 May 2019 and had not been actively pursued.
The respondent did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the response. The decision was procedural and does not record any determination of the underlying merits of the claimant's claims.
The Tribunal noted that the respondent would remain entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions, but would only be entitled to participate in any hearing to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not determine the substantive employment claims. It strikes out the respondent's response after the respondent failed to comply with the Tribunal's letter of 10 May 2019 and did not make sufficient representations, or request a hearing, in response to the letter of 11 June 2019. | 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.