Case 2502287/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Manning v Great Annual Savings Group — 2019
- Case reference
- 2502287/2019
- Decision date
- 11 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Manning
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 2 October 2019, the Tribunal gave Mr D Manning an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out under rule 37, on the bases that it had no reasonable prospect of success and had not been actively pursued. Mr Manning did not make representations and did not request a hearing.
The Tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim had no prospect of success because the claimant had less than two years' continuous employment. It also found that the claim had not been actively pursued. The claim was therefore struck out and the hearing listed for 18 November 2019 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37 after the claimant did not respond to the Tribunal's 2 October 2019 letter or request a hearing. The Tribunal found the claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the claimant had less than two years' continuous employment and that the claim had not been actively pursued. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.