Case 2405872/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Fraser Mrs L Howe Ms B Kelly Miss A Pearson Ms J Clinging Ms C Green v Mortimer Management Group Limited (in Administration) and 3 others — 2019
- Case reference
- 2405872/2019
- Decision date
- 27 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge V Butler
Parties
5 namedClaimant
Mrs L Fraser Mrs L Howe Ms B Kelly Miss A Pearson Ms J Clinging Ms C Green
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy an order dated 5 September 2019, the tribunal gave the claimants an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claims should not be struck out because they had not been actively pursued. The claimants did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The second respondent applied to strike out the claims on 26 September 2019. The claimants’ representative confirmed that there was no objection to that application. Employment Judge V Butler therefore ordered that the claims be struck out on 27 September 2019.
The judgment contains no substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claims and records no financial award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. This entry corresponds to the protective award / collective consultation aspect indicated by the case metadata. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The extracted judgment records a generic strike-out of the claims for not being actively pursued; the specific head of claim is not identified in the text. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- not actively pursued
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.