Case 2501871/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Suggett v Newman Scott Limited in Administration c/o Begbies Traynor — 2020
- Case reference
- 2501871/2019
- Decision date
- 9 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Suggett
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37. The judgment records that, by letter dated 6 February 2020, the claimant was given an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim, stating that it had no reasonable prospect of success and that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction.
The judgment does not identify any monetary remedy or any substantive determination of the underlying claim beyond the strike-out order.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the substantive claim type; it records only that the claim was struck out under rule 37. The gov.uk listing for the case refers to Protective Award and Redundancy. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37
- no reasonable prospect of success
- jurisdiction
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.