Case 2501345/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Lee v Opal It Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2501345/2020
- Decision date
- 15 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Lee
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr D Lee's claim against Opal It Limited under rule 37. It recorded that, by a letter dated 5 December 2020, the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out on the basis that he had not replied to the tribunal's correspondence and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal held that the claim should be struck out. The judgment does not record any substantive liability finding or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Rule 37 strike-out. The tribunal said the claimant had not replied to correspondence dated 29/10/2021 and 27/11/2020, had not made written representations or requested a hearing, and had not actively pursued the claim. The date 29/10/2021 appears inconsistent with the decision date and is recorded as written in the judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.