Case 2601913/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T Anderson v Shyne Together Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601913/2019
- Decision date
- 7 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T Anderson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented her claim on 2 July 2019 after a short period of employment as a Therapeutic Support Worker from 4 March 2019 to 1 May 2019. The tribunal recorded that the claim form contained little or no detail, and that later 'supported evidence' still did not explain the basis of the claims for constructive unfair dismissal, wages and holiday pay.
The claimant did not comply with case management orders to provide a schedule of loss and documents, did not respond to the respondent's request for further and better particulars, and failed to join the closed telephone preliminary hearing on 18 November 2019. A further order sent on 7 December 2019 required written explanations and, if relevant, medical evidence, but nothing further was received. The tribunal found that the claim was not being actively pursued, that the claimant had not complied with the tribunal's orders, and that she had made no written representations as to why the claims should not be struck out, so all claims were struck out. The hearing listed for November 2020 was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment refers to the claim as 'constructive unfair dismissal'; mapped here to constructive_dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The judgment refers only to 'wages' and gives no further particulars. | 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.