Case 2302118/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Thorne v Superdrug Stores plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302118/2019
- Decision date
- 22 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Thorne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant had failed to respond to a strike out warning dated 15 December 2020 and had failed actively to pursue the claim.
Under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Employment Judge Wright ordered that the claim be struck out on 22 July 2021. The judgment does not determine the substantive merits of the underlying claims or make any award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states only that 'the claim is struck out' and does not separately list causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states only that 'the claim is struck out' and does not separately list causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states only that 'the claim is struck out' and does not separately list causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states only that 'the claim is struck out' and does not separately list causes of action; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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.