Case 3306529/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Gregory v Panoramic Doors (UK) Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3306529/2021
- Decision date
- 29 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Gregory
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Tynan issued a judgment striking out Mrs N Gregory's claim against Panoramic Doors (UK) Limited (in voluntary liquidation). The reasons say that, by Case Management Orders sent on 29 August 2022, the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why the claim should not be struck out because she had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 15 August 2022 and because the case had not been actively pursued.
The Tribunal found that the claimant did not make representations in writing, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the claim. The judgment records no determination of the merits of any substantive employment claim and no monetary award.
The judgment is dated 7 November 2022 and was sent to the parties on 24 November 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive heads of claim; it states only that 'the claim is struck out' because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 15 August 2022, had not actively pursued the case, and did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing after the Case Management Orders sent on 29 August 2022. | 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.