Case 1406064/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Pitt v Asda Stores Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1406064/2020
- Decision date
- 2 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Pitt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that, by a letter dated 22 June 2021, the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claims should not be struck out. The stated grounds were non-compliance with Tribunal orders dated 19 February 2021, 21 April 2021, 11 May 2021, 14 May 2021 and 13 June 2021, and that the claims had not been actively pursued.
The claimant failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claims. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claims were struck out after the claimant failed to comply with Tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claims. The specific claim types are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claims were struck out after the claimant failed to comply with Tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claims. The specific claim types are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claims were struck out after the claimant failed to comply with Tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claims. The specific claim types are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment. | 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.