Case 2409316/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss P Blades v Nelson Warp Dressers — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409316/2023
- Decision date
- 13 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss P Blades
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss P Blades' claim against Nelson Warp Dressers. It recorded that, by letter dated 13 February 2024, the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued, after she had not replied to the tribunal's letters dated 21 December 2023 and 18 January 2024.
The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to make written representations, had failed to make any sufficient representations explaining why strike out should not follow, and had not requested a hearing. On that basis, the claim was struck out. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not separate this claim from the case as a whole; it states that 'the claim is struck out' because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not separate this claim from the case as a whole; it states that 'the claim is struck out' because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.