Case 2418794/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Hussain v Human Appeal — 2021
- Case reference
- 2418794/2020
- Decision date
- 24 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Hussain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy an order dated 2 July 2021, sent to the parties on 24 July 2021, the tribunal required the claimant to provide a schedule of loss, a disability witness statement, medical records, and other evidence relevant to disabilities. The tribunal later sent a letter dated 11 October 2021 giving the claimant an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out for non-compliance.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, in response to that letter and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Phil Allen struck out the claim.
Because the claim was struck out, there was no substantive determination of the underlying merits and no monetary award. The hearings listed for 17 November 2021 and 8 to 12 May 2023 were vacated and will not take place.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim because the claimant did not comply with the order made on 2 July 2021 requiring a schedule of loss, a disability witness statement, medical records and other evidence relevant to disabilities, and did not make sufficient representations in response to the 11 October 2021 warning letter. | 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.