Case 2207970/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms F. Rustvara v Marriott Hotels Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2207970/2023
- Decision date
- 1 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr Daniel
- Panel members
- Mr Daniel Jenkins, Ms Jessica Marshall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms F. Rustvara
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs F. Rustvara brought proceedings against Marriott Hotels Limited. The hearing took place by CVP at London Central on 29, 30 and 31 January 2024 and 1 February 2024. The tribunal records that the respondent applied on 31 January 2024 to strike out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b), on the basis that the proceedings had been conducted in a scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious manner, and/or under Rule 37(1)(c) because the claim had not been actively pursued. That application was refused.
On 1 February 2024, the tribunal acted on its own initiative and struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) because the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted was scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious. The written record states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The judgment contains no substantive findings on liability and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) on its own initiative on 1 February 2024. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) on its own initiative on 1 February 2024. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) on its own initiative on 1 February 2024. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) on its own initiative on 1 February 2024. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b) on its own initiative on 1 February 2024. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b)
- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(c)
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.