Case 1401488/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Tackie-Yaoboi & 4 others v Zoe Ann Roseway — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401488/2023
- Decision date
- 18 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pirani
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Tackie-Yaoboi & 4 others
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal gave the respondent an opportunity, by letter dated 18 August 2025, to make representations or request a hearing on why the response should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued.
The respondent failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The response was therefore struck out, with the respondent remaining entitled to notice of hearings and decisions and able to participate only to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The short judgment struck out the response because it had not been actively pursued. It did not determine the breach of contract claim on its merits. | Other | — | — |
| Redundancy | The short judgment struck out the response because it had not been actively pursued. It did not determine the redundancy pay claim on its merits. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The short judgment struck out the response because it had not been actively pursued. It did not determine the unfair dismissal claim on its merits. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.