Case 2500950/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Sroda v Cklip Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500950/2022
- Decision date
- 20 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Sroda
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 20 March 2023 before Employment Judge Arullendran at Newcastle CFCTC, the tribunal disposed of the case by striking out both pleaded claims. The claimant’s automatic unfair dismissal claim was struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal also struck out the claimant’s direct sex discrimination claim under the same rule. The written record does not record any monetary award, and it states that reasons were given orally at the hearing; no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days of sending the written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was described in the judgment as a claim of automatic unfair dismissal and was struck out pursuant to Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | Struck out | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The claim was described in the judgment as a claim of direct sex discrimination and was struck out pursuant to Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | Struck out | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.