Case 1403009/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Hensford v Polystar Plastics Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403009/2020
- Decision date
- 11 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Hensford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss C Hensford's claim against Polystar Plastics Limited. It recorded that by a letter dated 3 December 2002, the tribunal had given the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out because she had not complied with the order dated 8 October 2020 and the reminder sent on 23 November 2020, and because the claim 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 Gray ordered that the claim be struck out under Rule 37.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 37 because the claimant did not comply with the order dated 8 October 2020 and the reminder sent on 23 November 2020, and did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. The extracted text states a letter dated 3 December 2002, which appears inconsistent with the surrounding 2020 chronology. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.