Mr PA Kuras v Hurst Doors — 2020

Case reference: 1804860/2020
Decision date: 16 October 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Maidment Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr PA Kuras

Respondent

Hurst Doors

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

By a letter dated 01 October 2020, the tribunal gave Mr PA Kuras an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why his unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out. The reason given was that the tribunal appeared to have no jurisdiction to hear the claim and that the claimant appeared also to have received notice pay.

Mr Kuras did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Maidment struck out the claim under rule 37. The judgment records only that the unfair dismissal claim was struck out; it does not record any substantive determination of liability.

The hearing fixed for 21 October 2020 did not take place.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim after giving the claimant an opportunity by letter dated 01 October 2020 to make representations or request a hearing. The reasons state the tribunal appeared to have no jurisdiction to hear the claim and that the claimant appeared also to have received notice pay.	Struck out	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.