Case 1602355/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Davies v Calon Fawr Nursing Home Limited t/a Swansea Living Solutions — 2020
- Case reference
- 1602355/2019
- Decision date
- 3 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Davies
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 37 strike-out judgment. The claimant, Mr J Davies, did not attend the preliminary hearing on 1 September 2020. The tribunal then wrote by letter dated 27 October 2020 and by email of 17 November 2020 giving him an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make representations in writing, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The hearing listed for 7 December 2020 was vacated. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of the underlying merits or any monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not restate the underlying particulars of the claim; the strike-out was made under rule 37 because the claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing and did not make sufficient representations after being invited to do so. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not restate the underlying particulars of the claim; the strike-out was made under rule 37 because the claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing and did not make sufficient representations after being invited to do so. | 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.