Case 3309281/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Warren Fost v Mr Peter Brown — 2023
- Case reference
- 3309281/2022
- Decision date
- 27 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Warren Fost
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Quill Date struck out the claim under rule 37. The judgment records that the claimant had not supplied an early conciliation certificate number and had not supplied proof that the exemption relied on, namely that the respondent had contacted ACAS, actually applied. The tribunal said it proceeded on the assumption, without deciding, that the rules did not require the claim form to have been rejected.
By a letter dated 28 January 2023, the tribunal gave the claimant until 20 February 2023 to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not make written representations and did not ask for a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment is a procedural strike-out under rule 37. It says the claimant did not supply an early conciliation certificate number and did not prove the exemption relied on, and later failed to make representations or request a hearing after being given until 20 February 2023 to explain why the claim should not be struck out. | 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.