Case 2407613/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Morgan v Qvc UK — 2022
- Case reference
- 2407613/2021
- Decision date
- 7 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Morgan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Robinson sat alone on 7 June 2022. The claimant, Mr P Morgan, did not attend the hearing. The respondent, QVC UK, was represented by Mr C Kelly of Counsel.
On 15 October 2021 Employment Judge Johnson had warned the claimant that the tribunal was considering striking out all claims because he had failed actively to pursue them. The warning required a response by 5 November 2021, but the claimant did not respond positively.
Because the claimant did not attend the hearing and had not responded to the earlier warning, the tribunal struck out all claims as not actively pursued under Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The claims struck out were unfair dismissal, breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments, and discrimination arising from disability.
The final hearing listed for 11 to 13 January 2023 was cancelled. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out for failure actively to pursue the claim under Rule 37(1)(d). | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim relating to breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments; struck out for failure actively to pursue it under Rule 37(1)(d). | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim relating to discrimination arising from disability; struck out for failure actively to pursue it under Rule 37(1)(d). | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.