Case 2401264/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Bruford v Daisy Corporate Services Trading Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401264/2024
- Decision date
- 29 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Bruford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Manchester by video on 9 April 2025, Employment Judge Eeley struck out the claimant's claims in case 2401264/2024. The judgment states that the claims were struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(d) because they had not been actively pursued and under Rule 38(1)(c) because the claimant had not complied with a tribunal order.
The written record says the reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the decision. The extracted text does not identify the underlying causes of action or record any monetary award, so the outcome recorded here is strike-out only.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The written judgment does not identify the underlying cause(s) of action in the extracted text; it records that the claimant's claims were struck out collectively under Rule 38(1)(d) for not being actively pursued and Rule 38(1)(c) for non-compliance with a tribunal order. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(d)
- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(c)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.