Case 3220394/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Fogg v Howard Tenens — 2021
- Case reference
- 3220394/2020
- Decision date
- 8 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Fogg
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 11 January 2021, the Tribunal gave Mrs J Fogg an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why her unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out, because she had not complied with the Tribunal's strike out warning dated 11 January 2021. The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
Employment Judge Russell therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37. The judgment records no monetary award because the claim was disposed of by strike out.
The judgment also records that the claimant's remaining sex discrimination claim stayed listed for hearing on 24 June 2021. That claim was not determined by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint was struck out after the claimant did not make written representations or request a hearing in response to the Tribunal's letter dated 11 January 2021. The judgment notes that the claimant's remaining sex discrimination claim remained listed for hearing on 24 June 2021. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.