Case 3303947/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Infrastructure Ltd v David Goodjohn — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303947/2018
- Decision date
- 6 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Infrastructure Ltd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a strike-out judgment in case 3303947/2018. Employment Judge Ord recorded that, by letter dated 29 February 2020, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing by 16 March 2020 as to why the claim should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that the claimant had not complied with the tribunal's letter dated 6 December 2019 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim. The judgment does not set out the underlying substantive claim type, make findings on liability, or award any remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's letter dated 6 December 2019 and had not actively pursued the claim. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive cause of action. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.