Case 2201961/2022 · Employment Tribunal

None For the v Capsticks LLP — 2023

Case reference: 2201961/2022
Decision date: 31 August 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gidney Appearances
Venue: London Central

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

None For the

Respondent

Capsticks LLP

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The one-page judgment, heard on paper before Employment Judge Gidney at London Central on 31 August 2023, records that the Claimant had failed to respond to the strike-out warning issued by Employment Judge Khan on 23 August 2023. On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the Claimant's claim. The Claimant did not appear; Capsticks LLP appeared for the Respondent.

The judgment contains no findings on the merits of the underlying case and no award. The GOV.UK case listing identifies the jurisdiction as Redundancy and Unfair Dismissal, but the strike-out decision itself is limited to the procedural disposal of the claim.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Redundancy	The strike-out judgment does not separate individual claim heads. The GOV.UK case listing identifies Redundancy as one of the jurisdiction codes for this case, and the claim was struck out after the Claimant failed to respond to the strike-out warning issued on 23 August 2023.	Struck out	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The strike-out judgment does not separate individual claim heads. The GOV.UK case listing identifies Unfair Dismissal as one of the jurisdiction codes for this case, and the claim was struck out after the Claimant failed to respond to the strike-out warning issued on 23 August 2023.	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.

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.