Case 3312881/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs H Ford v The Leather Shop (Oxford) Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312881/2022
- Decision date
- 29 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Ford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal recorded that the respondent company had been dissolved and that the claimant had not successfully applied to have it restored to the Register of Companies. That procedural position meant the claim could not proceed against the respondent in its existing form.
On 7 May 2025 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim.
The judgment does not set out the substantive nature of the underlying employment claim, and it records no findings on liability or remedy beyond the strike-out order. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Anstis on 29 May 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying claim type. The claim was struck out because the respondent company had been dissolved and had not been restored to the Register of Companies, and because the claimant did not give an acceptable reason after being given an opportunity on 7 May 2025 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. | 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.