Case 3300607/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Saeed v And Citizens Advice Hounslow — 2021
- Case reference
- 3300607/2021
- Decision date
- 22 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vowles Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Saeed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed Ms J Saeed's claim under Rule 37 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. On 30 June 2021, the Tribunal wrote to her because an Employment Judge was considering strike out after she had failed to comply with the case management orders of 16 April 2021, as varied on 3 June 2021, and had not responded to Tribunal correspondence. The letter gave her 14 days to object in writing or request a hearing.
The Claimant did not respond. The Tribunal found that the claim had not been actively pursued and dismissed it for that reason. The judgment, signed by Employment Judge Vowles on 2 September 2021 and sent to the parties on 22 September 2021, records no substantive determination of the underlying allegations and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The written reasons record only a Rule 37 dismissal for failure to comply with case management orders and failure to respond to correspondence. The substance of the underlying discrimination allegation is not set out in the judgment and is inferred from the case listing context supplied with the prompt. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37 of Schedule 1 to the 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.
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.