Case 1600077/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Ridgeway v Mayflower Care Home Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600077/2021
- Decision date
- 11 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Ridgeway
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 20 January 2022, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated concerns were non-compliance with the Tribunal's order of 11 August 2021, including failure to provide a schedule of loss, exchange documents and written witness statements, and the fact that the claim had not been 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. The judgment does not record any merits findings on the pleaded employment claims.
The hearing listed for 14 and 15 March 2022 did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order of 11 August 2021 and because it had not been actively pursued; it did not separate individual pleaded claims or make merits findings. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order of 11 August 2021 and because it had not been actively pursued; it did not separate individual pleaded claims or make merits findings. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order of 11 August 2021 and because it had not been actively pursued; it did not separate individual pleaded claims or make merits findings. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order of 11 August 2021 and because it had not been actively pursued; it did not separate individual pleaded claims or make merits findings. | 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.