Case 1404492/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Cowling v Prestige Wheels Refurbishments Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1404492/2020
- Decision date
- 25 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Cowling
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal made no merits findings on the underlying employment claims. It decided only that case number 1404492/2020 should be struck out under rule 37. A letter dated 4 December 2020 had given the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the claim, which appeared to be a duplicate, should not be struck out for failure to comply with the Tribunal's order of 20 November 2020 and for not being actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. It noted separately that directions for a final hearing in the related claim under case number 1404302/2020 were being issued by separate order.
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 after giving the claimant an opportunity by letter dated 4 December 2020 to make representations or request a hearing. The reasons given were non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 20 November 2020 and that the claim had not been actively pursued. The judgment also states that case 1404492 appeared to be a duplicate. | 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.