Case 2415517/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Yedroudj v T J Morris Ltd and 2 others — 2019
- Case reference
- 2415517/2018
- Decision date
- 11 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr N Yedroudj
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the claimant failed to attend a preliminary hearing on 7 March 2019. He emailed that morning saying he could not attend because of emergency medical concerns, and was ordered to provide a medical report by 28 March 2019 addressing those concerns and when he would be well enough to attend any further preliminary hearing. He did not do so and did not seek another preliminary hearing.
The claimant also failed to comply with case management orders requiring a schedule of loss and further information about his claims, including any comparator and Equality Act provisions relied on. After the respondent applied for an unless order, the Tribunal asked the claimant to comment and provide a medical report by 16 May 2019; he did not respond.
By letter dated 27 June 2019, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing, so the claim was struck out and the listed September 2019 hearing was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not set out the substance of this complaint. | Struck out | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not determine the merits of the discrimination complaint. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole and does not determine the merits of the discrimination complaint. | Struck out | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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.