Case 3319442/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Hogg First v HBD Europe Limited Second Respondent: SK Clinic & Spas Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3319442/2019
- Decision date
- 5 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Representation
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Hogg First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Miss J Hogg did not attend the hearing at Bury St Edmunds and that neither respondent attended either. The judgment states that the claimant had failed to reply to the tribunal’s letter of 5 February 2020 and had also failed to attend the hearing.
On that basis, Employment Judge M Warren struck out the claimant’s claims on the ground that they were not being actively pursued. The judgment does not contain any findings on the underlying merits of the dispute and does not record any remedy assessment or award.
The extracted judgment text does not specify the pleaded causes of action. The only available case classification information supplied alongside the judgment is breach of contract, so that is the claim type recorded here with a struck-out outcome.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not identify the underlying claim type in the text; this classification follows the gov.uk listing category and claim-type hint. The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims because she did not reply to the tribunal's letter of 5 February 2020 and did not attend the hearing. | 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.