Case 2304240/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Benton v Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 2304240/2019
- Decision date
- 22 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Benton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim after the Claimant did not respond to a strike out warning sent on 22 September 2020. That order had stated that strike out was being considered because the Claimant had not attended a preliminary hearing, had not complied with orders made on 22 October 2019, and/or the claim was not being actively pursued.
The Claimant was given 14 days to provide written reasons for her non-attendance and non-compliance. The tribunal recorded that she did not correspond further with the tribunal and, according to the Respondent's representatives, did not correspond further with the Respondent. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under Rule 37 on the grounds of failure to comply with tribunal orders and failure actively to pursue the claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text refers only to the Claimant's claim(s) collectively and does not separately identify causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text refers only to the Claimant's claim(s) collectively and does not separately identify causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text refers only to the Claimant's claim(s) collectively and does not separately identify causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text refers only to the Claimant's claim(s) collectively and does not separately identify causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37
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.