Case 2209539/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Toby Pochron (Solicitor) For the v Mr Carlton Fernandes (Litigation Friend & Husband) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2209539/2023
- Decision date
- 27 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gidney Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Toby Pochron (Solicitor) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing heard in person at London Central on 27 October 2023 before Employment Judge Gidney. The tribunal recorded that the judgment was sent to the parties the same day, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The tribunal struck out all of the Claimant's claims. It relied first on Rule 37(1)(c) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure because the Claimant had not complied with the order to provide further particulars required by paragraph 8 of the case management order made by Employment Judge Nash on 18 August 2023, despite two strike out warnings sent on 6 October 2023 and 12 October 2023.
The tribunal also struck out the claims under Rule 37(1)(e), finding that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing in respect of the Claimant's claims. No monetary award or other remedy was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 37(1)(c) and Rule 37(1)(e). The text does not separately itemise individual pleaded claims. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Equal pay | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 37(1)(c) and Rule 37(1)(e). The text does not separately itemise individual pleaded claims. | Struck out | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 37(1)(c) and Rule 37(1)(e). The text does not separately itemise individual pleaded claims. | Struck out | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 37(1)(c) and Rule 37(1)(e). The text does not separately itemise individual pleaded claims. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's claims were struck out under Rule 37(1)(c) and Rule 37(1)(e). The text does not separately itemise individual pleaded claims. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(c) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Rule 37(1)(e) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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.