Case 1402712/2022 · Employment Tribunal
No appearance v Ms K Anderson - Counsel — 2023
- Case reference
- 1402712/2022
- Decision date
- 21 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Appearances
- Venue
- Exeter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No appearance
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal did not determine the merits of the pleaded complaints. Instead, it recorded that the Claimant had failed to comply with an order of Employment Judge David Hughes dated 20 January 2023 to particularise his claims by 6 February 2023, and had also failed to comply with a further order of Employment Judge Cadney on 24 February 2023 requiring particularisation by 3 March 2023. The Claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing on 7 March 2023.
On that basis, Employment Judge Smail ordered that the Claimant’s claims be struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and (d). No liability findings were made on the underlying unfair dismissal or disability discrimination complaints, and no compensation or other remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and (d) after the Claimant failed to comply with orders to particularise the claims and did not attend the preliminary hearing. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and (d) after the Claimant failed to comply with orders to particularise the claims and did not attend the preliminary hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rules 37(1)(c) and (d)
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.