Case 3306714/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Cutler v Luke Hastings, and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3306714/2024
- Decision date
- 22 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr M Cutler
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 15 May 2025, the tribunal gave Mr Cutler an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated grounds were that he had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 20 February 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The judgment records that Mr Cutler did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim. The decision does not contain any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claim(s).
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Underlying claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing category; the extracted judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Underlying claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing category; the extracted judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | Underlying claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing category; the extracted judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. | 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.