Case 3200597/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Dercsenyi v The Housing Ombudsman Service — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200597/2021
- Decision date
- 28 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C. Lewis Members
- Panel members
- Ms J Land, Mr ML Wood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E Dercsenyi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case on 10 February 2022 at East London Hearing Centre via CVP, with Employment Judge C. Lewis sitting with Ms J Land and Mr ML Wood. The claimant was Miss E Dercsenyi, appearing in person, and the respondent was The Housing Ombudsman Service, represented by counsel Ms Gilbert.
The judgment records a unanimous decision that the claimant’s claim was struck out under Rules 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules. The extracted text does not set out the underlying facts or merits reasoning beyond that procedural outcome.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment does not record any remedy assessment because the claim was not determined on the merits. The decision is dated 28 February 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The extracted judgment text does not state the substantive claim label, but the case listing context identifies the matter as a race discrimination claim. The tribunal unanimously struck the claim out under Rules 37(1)(c) and (d). | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rules 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.