Case 2400488/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 2400488/2025
- Decision date
- 9 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant applied under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 to strike out parts of the respondent's amended response and relied on alleged breaches of case management orders. The respondent accepted delay in serving the amended response and disclosure but said it had underestimated the work involved in addressing approximately 70 complaints and a large volume of documents.
The Tribunal found it could not determine, without examining witness and documentary evidence, whether the challenged paragraphs had no reasonable prospect of success or amounted to scandalous, vexatious or unreasonable conduct. It found the respondent had not deliberately breached orders or persistently disregarded them, disclosure had taken place, and a fair trial remained possible. The strike-out application was refused.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment determined the claimant's application to strike out the amended response, not the underlying discrimination complaints. The application was refused and the case was to proceed to the final hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.