Case 1806600/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Mircea Calin v GXO Logistics UK Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1806600/2023
- Decision date
- 22 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Mircea Calin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was an unfair dismissal claim presented on 13 October 2023. A hearing was listed for 4 March 2024, but the Claimant provided a doctor’s note saying he was signed off work with anxiety and a knee problem until 1 July 2024 and asked for the proceedings to be put on hold. The hearing was postponed, and it was later re-listed for 22 July 2024.
The Respondent then applied to strike out the claim, saying the Claimant was not actively pursuing it and had not provided evidence for a final hearing. On 12 July 2024, Employment Judge Lancaster warned that strike out was under consideration and gave the Claimant time to respond. The Claimant replied that he was very depressed and sick, with anxiety issues and other health problems, and said he wanted to continue when his health was good. Employment Judge Brain then stayed the claim until 21 October 2024 and ordered an update, but the Claimant did not provide one. A second strike-out application followed, and on 28 November 2024 the Claimant was ordered to respond and to say when he would be able to comply with case management orders and take part in a hearing, supported by medical evidence if he sought a further postponement.
Applying Rule 38 and the authorities cited, including Evans v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage, Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James and Harris v Academies Enterprise Trust, the Judge found that the claim had not been actively pursued and that there had been inordinate delay creating a substantial risk that a fair hearing was no longer possible. The Judge also found repeated non-compliance with disclosure, hearing-file and witness-statement orders, and no indication of when the Claimant would be well enough to proceed. The Judge accepted that the Claimant had been unwell, including with mental health and housing difficulties, but concluded that the delay prejudiced the Respondent and that no step short of strike out was proportionate. The claim was therefore struck out, with no remedy awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38 because the claim was not being actively pursued and the Claimant failed to comply with Tribunal orders; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 38
- Evans v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
- Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage
- Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James
- Harris v Academies Enterprise Trust
- 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.