Case 3304529/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Pula v Ranjita Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3304529/2022
- Decision date
- 1 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Pula
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 26 November 2022, correcting an earlier letter of 15 November 2022, the Tribunal gave Ms M Pula an opportunity to make representations in writing or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out. The stated grounds were that the proceedings had been conducted by or on behalf of the claimant in a scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious manner, that she had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 17 July 2022, and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The hearing listed for 6 December 2022 did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 after giving the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing by 1pm on 29 November 2022. The claimant did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. The order records that the strike-out was on the grounds that the proceedings had been conducted scandalously, unreasonably or vexatiously, that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 17 July 2022, and that the claim had not been actively pursued. | 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.