Case 2501982/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v A Robbins (one of HM Inspectors of Health and Safety) — 2025
- Case reference
- 2501982/2023
- Decision date
- 14 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 5 March 2025, the tribunal gave AME Building Limited an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the appeal should not be struck out. The stated concerns were that the appellant had not complied with orders to prepare and send witness statements for those who were going to be witnesses at the final hearing, despite saying it intended to rely on witness evidence, and that the appeal had not been actively pursued.
The appellant did not make written representations and did not ask to make oral representations at a hearing, including the final hearing listed to begin on 17 March 2025. In those circumstances, the tribunal struck out the appeal.
Because the appeal was struck out, the hearing fixed for 17 to 20 March 2025 did not take place. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Aspden on 14 March 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the appellant's appeal after a 5 March 2025 letter gave it an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about non-compliance with orders to exchange witness statements and failure to actively pursue the appeal. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.