Case 3305346/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Nicholas Smith v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305346/2021
- Decision date
- 8 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Matthews Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Nicholas Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant issued proceedings on 6 April 2021 claiming unfair dismissal. He did not attend the strike-out hearing on 8 April 2022 despite emails sent the day before and on the day of the hearing with information about joining the CVP hearing.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not complied with any tribunal orders, including failing to attend a final hearing listed on 10 November 2021. The respondent had served a skeleton argument seeking strike out on the grounds that the claim had not been actively pursued and that the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders, and the claimant served no response.
Employment Judge S Matthews was satisfied that the claimant had been given a reasonable opportunity to make representations. Having considered the extent of non-compliance and the possibility of lesser sanctions, the tribunal found it was not proportionate or in the interests of justice for the claim to continue, and struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was struck out for non-compliance with tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the claim; the substantive unfair dismissal allegations were not adjudicated. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37(1) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Rule 37(2) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Baber v Royal Bank of Scotland plc UKEAT/0301/15
- Rolls Royce PLC v Riddle UKEATS/0044/07
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.