Case 1801467/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Holliday v Mark Lee Transport Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801467/2023
- Decision date
- 20 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Holliday
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wade had required the Claimant to provide information about his age discrimination complaint by 22 May 2023. The Claimant did not comply with that order.
The Tribunal had previously informed the parties that there would be a preliminary hearing on 25 May 2023. The Claimant did not attend that hearing and gave no reason for his absence.
At the preliminary hearing on 25 May 2023, Employment Judge P Smith warned the Claimant that the Tribunal was considering striking out the claim because he had not complied with the order dated 15 May 2023 and had not actively pursued the claim. The Claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but he did not respond.
Employment Judge Davies concluded that the Claimant had failed to comply with Tribunal orders and was not actively pursuing the claim, so the claim should be struck out. The judgment records no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The age discrimination complaint was struck out for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the claim. No merits determination was made. | Struck out | Age | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.