Case 3301396/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Rowledge Pre-School Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3301396/2022
- Decision date
- 12 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment concerns four linked cases: 3301396/2022 to 3301399/2022. The respondent was Rowledge Pre-School Limited, and the claimants were Mrs K Renders, Mrs V Wilson, Mrs D Monk and Mrs J Lyver.
The Tribunal had previously made an order dated 29 May 2022. By letters dated 6 April 2023, it gave each claimant an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, explaining why their claims should not be struck out for non-compliance with that order.
The judgment records that each claimant failed to make written representations, or failed to make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Anstis struck out each claimant's claims.
No merits findings or monetary remedy were recorded in this judgment. The result was procedural only: all claims were struck out because of failure to comply with the Tribunal's order and to respond adequately to the Tribunal's subsequent opportunity to make representations.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the substantive claim types in the text provided. It records that each claimant's claims were struck out because they had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 29 May 2022 and did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing after the Tribunal's letters dated 6 April 2023. | Struck out | — | — |
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.