Case 1401168/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J McDonald v Babcock International — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401168/2023
- Decision date
- 20 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J McDonald
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 14 August 2023, the Tribunal gave Mr J McDonald an opportunity to make representations or 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, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
On that basis, Employment Judge Roper ordered that the claim be struck out. The judgment records only that the claim was not actively pursued and does not contain findings on the underlying merits of any substantive complaint.
The hearing listed for 27 September 2023 was vacated and did not take place. No monetary remedy was awarded or assessed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment strikes out the claim for failure to actively pursue it; it does not separate the listed causes of action into distinct outcomes. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim for failure to actively pursue it; it does not separate the listed causes of action into distinct outcomes. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.