Case 3301891/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Nicomedes Da Costa Rodrigues v Whittington Hospital — 2020
- Case reference
- 3301891/2020
- Decision date
- 19 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Nicomedes Da Costa Rodrigues
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal issued a strike out judgment in respect of the unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that by a letter dated 19 July 2020 the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, as to why that complaint should not be struck out. The reasons state that the claimant failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing.
On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37. The reasons also refer to the claimant not having complied with the Tribunal's order dated 19 August 2020. The judgment is limited to strike out of the unfair dismissal claim and does not determine the merits of that complaint.
The judgment records that the claimant's remaining claims of age discrimination and race discrimination remained extant. No remedy was awarded in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out under rule 37 after the claimant did not make representations or request a hearing in response to the Tribunal's letter dated 19 July 2020. The reasons also refer to non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 19 August 2020. | 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.