Case 1403870/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Mallinson v Art1 Services Limited t/a Manor Farm Residential Home — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403870/2020
- Decision date
- 29 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E Mallinson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 7 December 2020 Employment Judge Midgley ordered the claimant to provide the respondent with a statement setting out details of her alleged disability and any existing medical evidence by 18 January 2021. The respondent applied to strike out the claim on 26 January 2021 because that order had not been complied with, despite reminders, and because the claimant did not appear to be actively pursuing the case.
On 11 February 2021 Employment Judge Cadney ordered the claimant to respond to the strike-out application by 18 February 2021, but no response was received. By letter dated 12 March 2021 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing explaining why the claim should not be struck out for failure actively to pursue it. The respondent later told the Tribunal that it had emailed the strike-out warning to the claimant and had a confirmation of delivery receipt.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not provide sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The hearing listed for 28 April 2021 did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not determine the substantive merits. It strikes out the claim after the claimant failed to comply with case management orders and did not provide representations against strike out. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.