Case 2419880/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S McLean v The Three Saints Academy Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 2419880/2020
- Decision date
- 3 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S McLean
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal wrote to Ms McLean on 5 November 2025 warning that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared, applying Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, that the claim had not been actively pursued. The letter offered her an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but she did not reply.
Employment Judge M Butler was satisfied that the grounds for strike out under Rule 38 applied and that striking out the claim was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment therefore struck out the claim. It was sent to the parties on 3 December 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part-time worker regulations | The short judgment does not identify the substantive claim in the text; this claim type is inferred from the case context listing category 'Part Time Workers and Working Time Regulations'. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The short judgment does not identify the substantive claim in the text; this claim type is inferred from the case context listing category 'Part Time Workers and Working Time Regulations'. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 3 overriding objective
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.