Case 3306573/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Pretara v Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 3306573/2022
- Decision date
- 26 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Pretara
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Ms S Pretara's claim against Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust. The judgment records that, by letter dated 22 April 2024, the Tribunal gave the claimant until 24 April 2024 to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out.
The reasons listed in that letter were that the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted by or on behalf of the claimant had been scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious; that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 27 March 2023; that the claim had not been actively pursued; and that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing of the claim.
The claimant did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. The judgment also records that she failed to reply to the respondent's correspondence seeking orders and alleging non-compliance by the claimant. The claim was therefore struck out, and the hearing fixed for 29 April to 3 May 2024 was vacated. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The strike-out judgment does not identify the substantive cause or causes of action; it records only that the claim was struck out under rule 37. | 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.