Case 1404093/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend For the v Ms Moss, HR Manager — 2020
- Case reference
- 1404093/2019
- Decision date
- 2 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Appearances
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Did not attend For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe matter was heard at Bristol by telephone on 1 June 2020 before Employment Judge Midgley. The claimant did not attend. The respondent was represented by Ms Moss, HR Manager.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract in respect of notice pay, and redundancy pay under Rule 37. The stated reasons were that the claimant had failed to comply with the case management orders and was not actively pursuing his claims. The judgment records that the claims were therefore dismissed. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out pursuant to Rule 37 because the claimant failed to comply with case management orders and was not actively pursuing the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was in respect of notice pay. It was struck out pursuant to Rule 37 for failure to comply with case management orders and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | Struck out pursuant to Rule 37 because the claimant failed to comply with case management orders and was not actively pursuing the claim. | 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.