Case 1601715/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Sarah Mason v Pobl Group Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601715/2018
- Decision date
- 22 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hargrove
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Sarah Mason
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Sarah Mason presented claims on 23 November 2018 alleging discrimination arising from disability and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal recorded that she had been employed by Pobl Group Limited as a support worker dealing with vulnerable adults from 10 August 2016 until 29 June 2018, when she was dismissed for gross misconduct. The reasons section says the respondent denied disability and that, at an earlier case management stage, the tribunal had ordered a schedule of loss and a medical report on disability and its effects on decision-making capacity.
The tribunal found that none of the case management orders had been complied with. It noted repeated extensions, that the claimant’s representative later came off record, that warning letters were sent, and that the claimant’s emails showed she did not understand what was happening and was struggling to cope. By the hearing on 13 December 2019 she did not attend, although the tribunal had listed the matter to allow her to receive free ELIPS advice. Employment Judge Hargrove also noted that the claimant might be mentally ill, but no medical evidence or even a GP letter had been provided.
Applying Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, the judge held that the claims had not been actively pursued and struck them out. The reasons state that this was not the respondent’s fault, that serious allegations of discrimination had been left unresolved, and that it was not in the interests of justice for the claim to continue. The tribunal said the claimant could apply for reconsideration, but would need a very good explanation for the failures to comply with orders, supported by written medical evidence.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claim form presented on 23 November 2018 included discrimination arising from disability. The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 37(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim form also pleaded a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 37(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.