Case 2501654/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C. Hailes v Royal Mencap Society — 2023
- Case reference
- 2501654/2022
- Decision date
- 16 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C. Hailes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Miss C. Hailes did not attend the hearing at Newcastle Employment Tribunal on 16 June 2023. The respondent, Royal Mencap Society, was represented by Ms Martin, counsel. The case was heard by Employment Judge T.R. Smith sitting alone.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claim under case number 2501654/2022. The stated grounds were Rule 37(c), non-compliance with an order of the tribunal, and Rule 37(d), the claim not being actively pursued, under the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
No remedy was awarded or assessed in the judgment. The judgment states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in writing by either party within 14 days of the written record being sent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the specific pleaded claim types. It records that the claimant's claim under case number 2501654/2022 was struck out under Rule 37(c) for non-compliance with an order of the tribunal and Rule 37(d) for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(c) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 37(d) 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.