Case 2301027/2014 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v P Basanez — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301027/2014
- Decision date
- 23 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Andrews Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningA preliminary hearing was held on 25 January 2019. The claimant was ordered to write to the Tribunal and the respondent by 15 February 2019 confirming what claims, if any, she wished to pursue. No such notification was received.
On 10 February 2022 the parties were ordered to update the Tribunal on the status of the case and whether it was being actively pursued. They were advised that, if there was no reply, the claim would be struck out. No reply was received from either party and there was no other communication with the Tribunal.
The Employment Judge found that it was apparent the claimant was not actively pursuing the claim, and the claim was therefore struck out on 23 February 2022. The reasons do not record any determination on the merits of the underlying claims or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not restate the underlying claim type in the reasons; the gov.uk listing for this case identifies breach of contract, and the claim was struck out for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not restate the underlying claim type in the reasons; the gov.uk listing for this case identifies unfair dismissal, and the claim was struck out for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not restate the underlying claim type in the reasons; the gov.uk listing for this case identifies unlawful deduction from wages, and the claim was struck out for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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.