Mrs C Boyce v File Factory Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 3303788/2019
Decision date: 14 August 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Foxwell Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs C Boyce

Respondent

File Factory Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This is a rule 37 strike-out judgment in the case of Mrs C Boyce v File Factory Ltd. By a letter dated 7 July 2019, the tribunal gave the respondent an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, on why its response should not be struck out because it had not complied with the tribunal's direction dated 16 May 2019.

The respondent did not make representations in writing, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. Employment Judge Foxwell therefore struck out the response on 14 August 2019. The judgment records that the respondent would still be entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions of the tribunal, but could only participate in any hearing to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge. No merits findings or monetary award are recorded in the judgment text.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	This judgment records only that the respondent's response was struck out under rule 37 for non-compliance with a tribunal direction. The underlying substantive claims are not identified in the extracted text.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.