Case 2415274/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Phillips v Marks and Spencer plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415274/2020
- Decision date
- 15 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Phillips
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had written to the claimant on 20 April 2021 giving an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The reasons given were that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 24 February 2021 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim, and the hearing listed for 17 November 2021 was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim was struck out because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 24 February 2021 and the claim had not been actively pursued. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded causes of action, but the gov.uk listing categories identify unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that the claim was struck out because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 24 February 2021 and the claim had not been actively pursued. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded causes of action, but the gov.uk listing categories identify public interest disclosure. | 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.