Case 2400232/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Houlihan v Bernie Guilder — 2021
- Case reference
- 2400232/2020
- Decision date
- 12 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Houlihan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 15 January 2021 the tribunal held a case management preliminary hearing by telephone. The claimant did not attend. The tribunal then made case management orders requiring the claimant, if she wished to pursue the case, to write to the tribunal confirming that she was doing so and to explain her non-attendance. The case management summary warned that if she did not confirm she was pursuing the claim, it might be struck out on the basis that it was not being actively pursued.
No communication was received from the claimant by the 26 February 2021 deadline. The respondent wrote on 2 March 2021 seeking an Unless Order because of the non-compliance. The tribunal decided an Unless Order was not appropriate because the claimant had already been warned in the case management summary that failure to comply was likely to lead to strike out. Finding nothing to indicate that the claimant was continuing to pursue the case, the tribunal struck out the claim and cancelled the hearing listed for 21 May 2021.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole for not being actively pursued; it does not separate individual heads of claim. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole for not being actively pursued; it does not separate individual heads of claim. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole for not being actively pursued; it does not separate individual heads of claim. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole for not being actively pursued; it does not separate individual heads of claim. | 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.