Case 3300551/2023 · Employment Tribunal
S Page (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300551/2023
- Decision date
- 23 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
S Page (counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract and age discrimination on 20 January 2023, but no particulars of claim were provided. The respondent applied to strike out the claim in its entirety on 18 May 2023. The claimant later applied on 27 June 2023 to amend the claim to include particulars of the age discrimination allegation and to withdraw the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims.
At the hearing on 5 July 2023 before Employment Judge Anderson, the tribunal refused the application to amend so as to provide particulars of the age discrimination claim. The respondent then sought strike out of that claim on the basis that, because the amendment had been refused, there was no substance to the claim and no extant cause of action, so it had no reasonable prospects of success. The claimant's representative accepted that, given the ruling on amendment, there was no extant cause of action and made no further submissions.
The tribunal found that the claimant had identified no facts in her claim on which an age discrimination claim could be founded. The age discrimination claim was therefore struck out. The unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims were dismissed upon withdrawal. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states this claim was dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant applied to withdraw it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states this claim was dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant applied to withdraw it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend to provide particulars of the age discrimination claim, found no facts were identified on which such a claim could be founded, and struck it out for no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Age | — |
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.