Case 3305726/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Malmur v Riot Labs Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3305726/2024
- Decision date
- 1 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Malmur
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 29 August 2025, the tribunal gave Riot Labs Ltd an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing as to why its response should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that the respondent had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 14 May 2025 and that the matter had not been actively pursued.
The respondent did not make sufficient representations, or did not make any representations at all, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the response. The judgment records that at the hearing starting on 7 October 2025 the Judge would consider liability and remedy, with the respondent able to participate only to the extent allowed by the Judge because its response had been struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the respondent's response was struck out for failure to comply with the tribunal's order of 14 May 2025 and because the matter had not been actively pursued. The substantive liability and remedy issues were listed to be considered at a hearing starting on 7 October 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.