Case 1404235/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Andrews v Versant Developments & Homes Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1404235/2021
- Decision date
- 25 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Andrews
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy an Order dated 3 August 2022, the Tribunal gave the Respondent an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why its response should not be struck out. The stated bases were that the Respondent had not complied with the Tribunal's Order and that the case had not been actively pursued.
The Respondent did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, explaining why strike out should not follow, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Livesey ordered that the response be struck out.
The judgment does not contain any determination of the substantive employment claims or any monetary award. It states only that the Respondent remains entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions of the Tribunal, but may participate in any hearing only to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not determine the underlying pleaded claims on their merits. It records only that the Respondent's response was struck out after the Tribunal's Order of 3 August 2022, because the Respondent had not complied with the Tribunal's Order and had not actively pursued the case, and did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
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.