Case 2201995/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Kumari v Oxygen 8 Limited (in liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2201995/2019
- Decision date
- 14 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Balogun Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Kumari
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 17 November 2022, the Tribunal gave Mrs A Kumari an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment records that she failed to make representations in writing, failed to make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim by judgment dated 14 December 2022. The reasons do not contain any substantive findings on liability or any remedy assessment, and no award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Claim type taken from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out after the claimant failed to respond to the Tribunal's strike-out warning. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type taken from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out after the claimant failed to make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.