Case 2301142/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mis A O Solomonean v Tesco Natalie Horne and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301142/2022
- Decision date
- 6 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mis A O Solomonean
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the unfair dismissal complaint in this decision. It issued a strike out judgment under rule 37 because the claim had no reasonable prospect of success, recording that the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore did not meet the qualifying period point relied on in the reasons.
By letter dated 24 July 2023, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The reasons record that the claimant did not make representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal noted that the claimant's remaining claims were still listed for a preliminary hearing on 19 January 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37 after giving the claimant an opportunity by letter dated 24 July 2023 to make representations or request a hearing. It recorded that the claimant was employed for less than two years and had failed to make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.