Mr L Birdsey v King Arthur Inns Ltd — 2023

Case reference: 3312928/2022
Decision date: 31 March 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Quill

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr L Birdsey

Respondent

King Arthur Inns Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 20 February 2023 after he had failed to respond to earlier correspondence. The letter required him to reply by 6 March 2023 and to provide further information about his claim, and it warned that the claim would be struck out if he did not respond.

The claimant did not reply with the required information or at all. The tribunal found that he was not complying with Tribunal orders or actively pursuing his claim, and it therefore dismissed the claim under rule 37(1)(d).

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal's short judgment records that the claimant did not reply to earlier correspondence or provide the further information requested, and therefore was not actively pursuing the claim. The merits were not determined; the claim was dismissed under rule 37(1)(d).	Struck out	—	—
Other	The tribunal's short judgment records that the claimant did not reply to earlier correspondence or provide the further information requested, and therefore was not actively pursuing the claim. The merits were not determined; the claim was dismissed under rule 37(1)(d).	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.