Case 3205186/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Kamaruddin v Hartford Health Centre — 2022
- Case reference
- 3205186/2021
- Decision date
- 15 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Housego Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Kamaruddin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 24 May 2022 the tribunal made an order for disclosure of documents and for witness statements. The claimant did not comply with that order. The tribunal wrote on 7 July 2022 asking the claimant to explain the non-compliance, but no response was received.
The tribunal wrote again on 18 August 2022 warning that the Employment Judge was considering striking out the claim for non-compliance with the 24 May 2022 order. The claimant did not respond to that warning either.
At the hearing on 15 September 2022, Employment Judge Housego struck out the claims under Rules 37 and 38. The reasons given were non-compliance with the tribunal's order and that the claim was not being actively pursued. No merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment does not specify the substantive claim type in the reasons; this classification follows the gov.uk listing for the case. The tribunal struck out the claims under Rules 37 and 38 for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not specify the substantive claim type in the reasons; this classification follows the gov.uk listing for the case. The tribunal struck out the claims under Rules 37 and 38 for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not specify the substantive claim type in the reasons; this classification follows the gov.uk listing for the case. The tribunal struck out the claims under Rules 37 and 38 for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rules 37 & 38
- Rule 37
- non-compliance with an order
- not actively pursued
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.