Case 3301160/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms I Krungleviciene v Wm Morrisons Supermarket plc — 2022
- Case reference
- 3301160/2021
- Decision date
- 23 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms I Krungleviciene
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 8 September 2022, the Tribunal gave Ms I Krungleviciene an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out. The reasons identified in that letter included failure to comply with Tribunal orders and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
Ms Krungleviciene did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. There was also no response to the respondent's application dated 18 August 2022, or to the Tribunal's questionnaire sent on 8 September 2022. In light of that non-engagement, the Tribunal struck out the claim.
The hearing listed for 3 to 5 October 2022 did not go ahead because the claim was struck out on 23 September 2022. The judgment records no substantive liability findings and no monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause of action. It states only that 'the claim is struck out' under rule 37 because the claimant did not make written representations or request a hearing, did not respond to the respondent's application dated 18 August 2022, and did not respond to the Tribunal's questionnaire sent on 8 September 2022. | 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.