Case 2305784/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Matthew Kirton v Andy Johnstone (Cosgrove Leisure Parks UK) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2305784/2021
- Decision date
- 5 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hart Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Matthew Kirton
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a strike out judgment under rule 37. By a letter dated 17 July 2023, the Tribunal gave Mr Matthew Kirton an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued.
Mr Kirton did not make any written representations and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Hart struck out the claim. No substantive liability findings or remedy assessment were made in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out 'the claim' under rule 37 for not being actively pursued. The pleaded cause of action is not separately described in the judgment text; this claim type is inferred from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out 'the claim' under rule 37 for not being actively pursued. The pleaded cause of action is not separately described in the judgment text; this claim type is inferred from the case listing. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.