Case 3303626/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ali v Sachin — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303626/2019
- Decision date
- 10 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 21 August 2019, the Tribunal gave Mr D Ali an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on whether the claim should be struck out. The stated grounds were that the claim appeared to be scandalous or vexatious, that it had not been actively pursued, and that the claimant had not replied to Tribunal correspondence dated 10 July 2019.
Mr Ali did not make any written representations and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Laidler ordered that the claim be struck out. The judgment records no findings on the underlying merits of any substantive complaint and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim was struck out under rule 37 after the claimant did not respond to the Tribunal's letter dated 21 August 2019 or request a hearing. The Tribunal referred to possible strike out because the claim was said to be scandalous or vexatious, not actively pursued, and because the claimant had not replied to correspondence dated 10 July 2019. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.