Case 3305370/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Reynolds v Metroline Travel Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305370/2021
- Decision date
- 13 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Reynolds
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's claim. The reason given was that the claimant had failed to comply with the tribunal's unless order dated 1 April 2022 and sent to the parties on 9 April 2022.
The judgment records that the claimant had failed to make written representations, or sufficient written representations, explaining why strike-out should not occur, and had not requested a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim without determining the merits of the underlying complaints.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim/claims were struck out for failure to comply with an unless order; it does not address the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim/claims were struck out for failure to comply with an unless order; it does not address the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim/claims were struck out for failure to comply with an unless order; it does not address the merits. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the claim/claims were struck out for failure to comply with an unless order; it does not address the merits. | Struck out | Sex | — |
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.