Case 1401582/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Ismael v St Mungo Community Housing Association — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401582/2025
- Decision date
- 13 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Ismael
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had written to the claimant on 13 November 2025 warning that it was considering striking out the claim because the claimant had not complied with Tribunal orders dated 9 September 2025 and 14 October 2025, and because the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not reply to explain why the claim should not be struck out or request a hearing. Employment Judge Gray was satisfied that the grounds for strike-out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that strike-out was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim was struck out under Rule 38 after non-compliance with tribunal orders and lack of active pursuit. The gov.uk listing category identifies unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim was struck out under Rule 38 after non-compliance with tribunal orders and lack of active pursuit. The gov.uk listing category identifies breach of contract. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- overriding objective in Rule 3
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.