Case 2500539/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Tate Ms C Dale v Glenn Norman Walsh & Julie Marie Walsh Trading As Stockton Industrial Services — 2021
- Case reference
- 2500539/2020
- Decision date
- 15 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Tate Ms C Dale
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that, by letter dated 26 January 2021, the claimants were given an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why their claims should not be struck out. The stated grounds were that the claimants had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 26 January 2021 and that the claims had not been actively pursued.
The claimants did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Sweeney ordered that the claims be struck out under rule 37. The judgment does not set out any determination on the substantive merits of the underlying claims.
The judgment is a brief strike-out decision and does not record any remedy, liability findings, or award of compensation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claims were struck out under rule 37 after the claimants failed to comply with the Tribunal's order dated 26 January 2021 and did not actively pursue the claims. The judgment text does not identify the individual heads of claim, so this classification follows the case listing categories. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the claims were struck out under rule 37 after the claimants failed to comply with the Tribunal's order dated 26 January 2021 and did not actively pursue the claims. The judgment text does not identify the individual heads of claim, so this classification follows the case listing categories. | Struck out | — | — |
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.