Case 2409589/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Marques v East 45 Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409589/2023
- Decision date
- 24 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Marques
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Dunlop at Manchester on 7 June 2024. The claimant, Miss A Marques, did not attend. The respondent was represented by Mr J Quinton.
The tribunal recorded that the claim had been submitted on the claimant's behalf by a former colleague as part of a multiple claim, but the former colleague was no longer directly in touch with her. The claimant had not responded to correspondence about the case or complied with case management orders, and she had not attended either of the two hearings listed in the matter.
The tribunal said it was doubtful whether the claimant even knew about the claim, but in any event she was not actively pursuing it. Applying Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the tribunal concluded that strike out was the only appropriate course and struck the claim out in its entirety. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive causes of action. The claim was struck out in its entirety because it was not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 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.