Case 2301675/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Griffin-Hamilton v Millmoll Furniture Hire UK — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301675/2022
- Decision date
- 6 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Khalil Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Griffin-Hamilton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 6 August 2024 Acting Regional Employment Judge Khalil Date struck out the claims against Millmoll Furniture Hire UK. The tribunal recorded that a strike-out warning dated 6 November 2023 had given the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out because the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders dated 4 July 2023 and because the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing by 27 November 2023. The tribunal therefore struck out the claims. No remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment refers generically to 'the claims' and does not separate the causes of action; this entry reflects the case listing context. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment refers generically to 'the claims' and does not separate the causes of action; this entry reflects the case listing context. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment refers generically to 'the claims' and does not separate the causes of action; this entry reflects the case listing context. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment refers generically to 'the claims' and does not separate the causes of action; this entry reflects the case listing context. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
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.