Case 2403141/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Seker v Rosewood Agency — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403141/2022
- Decision date
- 1 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Seker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss M Seker's claim against Rosewood Agency. The hearing on 26 January 2023 proceeded in the claimant's absence, and the tribunal recorded that she did not attend and could not be contacted. The reasons refer to a case management order sent to the parties on 1 February 2023 requiring the claimant to provide information about her claim by 1 March 2022, together with a case management summary that contained a bold "STRIKE OUT WARNING".
The tribunal noted that the claimant provided no further information and made no contact with the tribunal. It held that the order was not properly an Unless Order under Rule 38 because it did not clearly state that the claim would be dismissed without further order for non-compliance, but it did make clear that failure to comply could result in strike out. The tribunal found that the claimant had a reasonable opportunity to make representations, that she had failed to comply with the order, and that she had not pursued the claim actively. It concluded that there was no reason why the claim should not be struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause or causes of action. The entire claim was struck out under Rule 37 for non-compliance with a case management order and for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- Rule 38 Unless Order
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.