Case 2302200/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Strakova v HCA International Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2302200/2021
- Decision date
- 20 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Strakova
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing held by video on 8 December 2022, Employment Judge L Burge considered case numbers 2302200/2021 and 2304850/2021. The written record states that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The Tribunal held that the Claimant's ordinary constructive dismissal claim had no reasonable prospects of success. It also held that the claim described as constructive dismissal pursuant to section 103A and/or section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996 had no reasonable prospects of success.
Both claims were struck out under Rule 37(1) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Described in the judgment as the Claimant's ordinary constructive dismissal claim. It was struck out because the Tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success under Rule 37(1). | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Described in the judgment as constructive dismissal pursuant to section 103A and/or section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996. It was struck out because the Tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success under Rule 37(1). | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1) strike out
- no reasonable prospects 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.