Case 1600947/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Values in Care Ltd and Swanton Care & Community Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600947/2024
- Decision date
- 13 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim after the claimant failed to attend a preliminary hearing on 13 November 2024 and was given an opportunity to make written representations by 20 November 2024 or oral representations at a hearing on 22 November 2024. The claimant did not make written representations and did not attend the later hearing.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not complied with multiple tribunal orders, including orders made by Employment Judge Brace on 19 September 2024, and had not actively pursued the claim. It considered the history of missed deadlines, non-attendance, the strike-out warnings, and the overriding objective, and concluded that the claim should be struck out in its entirety against both respondents.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The case was initially treated as an unfair dismissal claim and the claim was struck out in its entirety under rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal recorded that the claimant had been ordered to confirm whether she intended to pursue a whistleblowing complaint and provide particulars, but she did not do so. The public listing categories include Public Interest Disclosure. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- overriding objective
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.