Case 2207521/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Clarke v Compass Group UK & Ireland Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2207521/2020
- Decision date
- 1 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Clarke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant lodged a claim on 9 December 2020, ticking complaints including unfair dismissal, discrimination on grounds of age, race and disability, redundancy payment, notice pay, holiday pay, unlawful deductions from wages, other payments and an injury claim. She gave no details and said she would submit a statement of claim within 28 days due to illness, but did not do so.
A preliminary hearing case management hearing was listed for 2 August 2021. The claimant applied for postponement shortly before the hearing, saying she was abroad for a court hearing on the same day. The tribunal ordered her to provide evidence of the overseas proceedings and hearing, and to confirm which complaints she was pursuing and any application to amend. She was warned that strike out was being considered if she did not comply.
The tribunal extended time and made an Unless Order requiring the claimant to produce a claim or defence in her name in the Nigerian proceedings, together with a notice of hearing requiring her attendance on 2 August 2021. The tribunal found that the documents supplied did not show she was the same person involved in the Nigerian proceedings and did not include the required notice of hearing for 2 August. It concluded that she had failed to comply with the Unless Order, and struck out the claim under Rule 38(1).
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant ticked this complaint in the ET1, but the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1) after failure to comply with an Unless Order. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The claimant ticked this complaint in the ET1, but the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1) after failure to comply with an Unless Order. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant ticked this complaint in the ET1, but the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1) after failure to comply with an Unless Order. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claimant ticked this complaint in the ET1, but the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1) after failure to comply with an Unless Order. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | The claimant ticked redundancy payment in the ET1, but the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1) after failure to comply with an Unless Order. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claimant ticked notice pay in the ET1. This is classified as breach of contract; the whole claim was struck out under Rule 38(1). | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38(1), Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.