Case 2300429/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v DePaul UK — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300429/2021
- Decision date
- 3 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams-Parish
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 20 January 2022 the tribunal wrote to the claimant, on the instruction of Employment Judge Hyams-Parish, requiring him to confirm within seven days whether he intended to pursue the case. The claimant was warned that if he did not respond, the matter could be referred to an Employment Judge for consideration of strike out because the claim was not being actively pursued.
The claimant did not reply. Having considered the history of the litigation, Employment Judge K Andrews struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013. The judgment heading also states that the claim is dismissed, but the operative reasons explain that the disposal was strike out for non-pursuit.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment also states that the claim is dismissed, but the reasons record that it was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 after the claimant did not respond to the tribunal's letter of 20 January 2022. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.