Case 3301242/2014 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Darroux v Sunridge Housing Association — 2018
- Case reference
- 3301242/2014
- Decision date
- 17 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Darroux
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mrs P Darroux, brought claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination against Sunridge Housing Association after her dismissal on 1 April 2014. The tribunal recorded that it had heard no evidence and made no findings of fact on the merits. It instead dealt with the case as an application to strike out after the claimant failed to comply with case management orders made on 17 July 2019 and failed to show cause why the claims should continue.
The tribunal found that the claimant had knowledge of the July 2019 orders and later received them by email, but did not comply with them. In particular, she did not serve evidence dealing with the race discrimination allegations or remedy, and she did not prepare a schedule of loss for unfair dismissal. The tribunal said the race discrimination claim could not receive a fair trial without the claimant's evidence on the alleged discriminatory acts, especially given that the events were said to have occurred before April 2014.
The tribunal considered whether to allow the unfair dismissal claim to proceed on a limited basis, but rejected that course. It held that striking out only the discrimination claim and trying unfair dismissal alone would not do justice to the respondent, and that the claimant had had a very long time to prepare. Both claims were therefore struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal struck out the race discrimination claim under Rule 37 for non-compliance with the orders made on 17 July 2019 and for failure to show cause. It noted that the claimant had not served evidence about the 12 alleged acts of racial discrimination and that, without that evidence, the respondent did not know what it had to answer. The tribunal made no findings on liability. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim as well. It accepted that the claimant's default on unfair dismissal was limited to remedy, but decided that proceeding to liability only would not do justice to the respondent. The tribunal noted that preparation of a schedule of loss was an essential element of the claim and that the claimant had failed to address remedy or show cause. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- overriding objective
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.