Case 3202552/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Moor v Gateway Housing Association Ltd. — 2021
- Case reference
- 3202552/2019
- Decision date
- 17 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Elgot Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Moor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the case at a remote hearing on 5 February 2021 before Employment Judge B Elgot. The Claimant was in person and the Respondent was represented by counsel. The judgment records that the remote format was not objected to by the parties and that a face-to-face hearing was not held because the matters could be determined remotely.
The Claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, race discrimination, disability discrimination, victimisation and breach of contract were struck out and dismissed under Rule 37(1)(c) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The tribunal found that the Claimant had persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including the orders made at a preliminary hearing on 12 October 2020 requiring him to provide further information about his claims and to send a schedule of loss.
The judgment states that extensions of time were granted to 18 December 2020 and then to 13 January 2021, but the Claimant still did not comply. He had been warned that he was at risk of strike out. The tribunal concluded that a fair trial on the listed merits hearing dates of 2 to 5 March 2021 was not possible.
The tribunal also found that, even if the hearing were adjourned and further orders made, including unless orders and costs penalties, the seriousness and magnitude of the Claimant's non-compliance and his responses in correspondence meant that a fair trial could not be achieved. No merits findings or monetary awards were made.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out and dismissed pursuant to Rule 37(1)(c) because the Claimant persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including orders to provide further information and a schedule of loss. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Struck out and dismissed pursuant to Rule 37(1)(c) because the Claimant persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including orders to provide further information and a schedule of loss. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out and dismissed pursuant to Rule 37(1)(c) because the Claimant persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including orders to provide further information and a schedule of loss. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Struck out and dismissed pursuant to Rule 37(1)(c) because the Claimant persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including orders to provide further information and a schedule of loss. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Struck out and dismissed pursuant to Rule 37(1)(c) because the Claimant persistently and repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including orders to provide further information and a schedule of loss. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(c) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.