Case 3201907/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Lawrence v Lloyds Bank plc OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 3201907/2021
- Decision date
- 26 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Lawrence
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination after his dismissal for alleged gross misconduct with effect from 4 December 2020. The respondent applied to strike out the claims on the basis that the claimant had not complied with Tribunal orders, had not provided the requested material, and had not actively pursued the case. The Tribunal recorded a history of orders requiring the claimant to fill gaps in the list of issues, provide up-to-date GP records, disclose documents, and exchange witness statements, together with warnings that non-compliance could lead to strike-out.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 37 for repeated non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the claim; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out under Rule 37 for repeated non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the claim; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37
- overriding objective
- Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage
- Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James
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.