Case 2306377/2020 · Employment Tribunal
S Luffingham v Slade Primary School And Attached Unit For Children With Hearing Impairment and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2306377/2020
- Decision date
- 18 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrews
Parties
3 namedClaimant
S Luffingham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim. It recorded that, by a letter dated 3 June 2025, the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about why the claim should not be struck out on the basis that it had not been actively pursued.
The claimant failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim because it had not been actively pursued. The one-page judgment does not set out the underlying issues; this classification follows the listing category. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment strikes out the claim because it had not been actively pursued. The one-page judgment does not set out the underlying issues; this classification follows the listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment strikes out the claim because it had not been actively pursued. The one-page judgment does not set out the underlying issues; this classification follows the listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
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.