Case 2301259/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Chloe Bowditch v Rochester Health Club Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301259/2022
- Decision date
- 18 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms M Foster-Norman, Mr S Sheath
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Chloe Bowditch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Chloe Bowditch, brought claims for discrimination and unfair dismissal against Rochester Health Club Ltd. The respondent denied discrimination and said that no dismissal had taken place, because the claimant was still on its books.
The tribunal noted that the claimant had failed to respond to an 8 August 2022 direction asking her to comment on the dismissal point within 14 days. She also did not attend the case management hearing on 15 March 2023, when an order was made requiring her to inform the tribunal by 19 April 2023 whether she was pursuing the claim.
By the final hearing on 11 September 2023, the claimant had provided no evidence and had not communicated with either the respondent or the tribunal. The clerk called her six times, left two voicemails, and sent an email, but she did not attend.
The tribunal found that the claim was not being actively pursued and struck it out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the claimant brought a discrimination claim, but it does not specify the protected characteristic in the extracted text. The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) because it was not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The respondent said no dismissal had taken place and the claimant was still on its books. The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim under rule 37(1)(d) because the claimant was not actively pursuing the case. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules
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.