Case 3322892/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person with her husband present For the v Mr Heath (solicitor) Interpreter: Mr Juszczak (Polish) (for claimant) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3322892/2021
- Decision date
- 29 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge King Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person with her husband present For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims against Vita Cellular Foams Limited. The gov.uk listing category identifies the case as age discrimination, and the written judgment records that the claimant's claims were struck out.
The tribunal struck out the claims as having no reasonable prospects of success pursuant to Rule 38(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success under Rule 38(1)(b). Written reasons were not provided in the extracted text. | Struck out | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.