Case 2217705/2023 · Employment Tribunal
THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Respondent Mr M Siegieda v London Borough of Hounslow and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2217705/2023
- Decision date
- 17 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Dated
Parties
3 namedClaimant
THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Respondent Mr M Siegieda
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim had been listed for a five-day hearing starting on 1 November 2024, then relisted for 9 January 2025 and again for 20 October 2025. The Tribunal’s case management order required witness statements to be exchanged by 14 October 2024.
On 22 September 2025 the Respondents wrote to the Tribunal saying that, although they had been ready to exchange witness statements for some months, the Claimant had not replied to their attempts to agree a date for exchange. They applied for the claim to be struck out, or alternatively for an unless order. The Tribunal wrote to the Claimant on 2 October 2025 asking for any objection by 8 October 2025 and warning that the application would otherwise be decided without further reference to him, but no reply was received.
Employment Judge Glennie considered whether a lesser sanction, particularly an unless order, would be a feasible alternative. The judgment records that even a short compliance period would leave only about three working days, or less, before the 20 October 2025 hearing, which the Judge found would make a fair five-day trial unlikely. In the absence of any explanation for the default, the Tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the grounds of non-compliance with a Tribunal order and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive cause or causes of action; it records only that 'the claim' was struck out under Rule 38 for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.