Case 2601727/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M A Hagan & others (see below schedule) v Ashley Cox — 2022
- Case reference
- 2601727/2021
- Decision date
- 25 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M A Hagan & others (see below schedule)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 15 March 2022, the tribunal gave the respondent an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the response should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. The respondent did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The tribunal therefore struck out the response. The judgment does not decide the merits of the underlying claims listed in the schedule, which are 2601727/2021 and 2601757/2021, both brought by Mrs Mary Ann Hagan against Ashley Cox.
The tribunal recorded that the respondent remains entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions, but may only participate in any hearing to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not determine the substantive claims; it strikes out the respondent's response after the respondent failed to make sufficient representations or request a hearing in relation to proposed strike-out for lack of active pursuit. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.