Case 2203096/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Bentley And v London Borough of Ealing — 2020
- Case reference
- 2203096/2019
- Decision date
- 12 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Bentley And
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal struck out Mr M Bentley's claim against the London Borough of Ealing. The Tribunal had written on 27 February 2020 giving the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out because he had not attended the case management hearing listed for 27 February 2020, had not complied with the Tribunal's order of that date, the claim had no reasonable prospect of success, and it had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The extracted judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying complaint or any monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment text does not identify the underlying legal cause of action; it only records that 'the claim' was struck out after the claimant failed to respond adequately to the Tribunal's letter dated 27 February 2020. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.