Case 1402734/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Akyea v Heath and Wiltshire Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1402734/2019
- Decision date
- 13 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R. Harper MBE
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Akyea
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dealt with the matter as a strike out judgment under rule 37. It recorded that by letter dated 28 November 2019 the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out for non-compliance with paragraph 3(i) and 3(ii) of the case management order and the Tribunal's 28 November 2019 letter.
The Tribunal noted that nothing had been heard from the claimant since her representative's email of 19 November 2019, which said that they were unable to contact their client to seek further instructions. It found that the claimant had failed to make written representations, had failed to make sufficient representations, and had not requested a hearing. The claim was therefore struck out. No substantive liability or remedy issues were determined.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim was struck out under rule 37 for failure to comply with the case management order and the Tribunal's letter dated 28 November 2019, and because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.