Case 3324584/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss H Remblence v SPTMY Limited (In Administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3324584/2019
- Decision date
- 7 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss H Remblence
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 7 November 2020, the tribunal gave Miss H Remblence an opportunity to make written representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37. The extracted judgment records no findings on the merits of the underlying claims and no monetary award. The judgment is dated 12 January 2021 and was sent to the parties on 2 February 2021.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the claim under rule 37 for not being actively pursued; the extracted text does not separately address the underlying breach of contract claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment struck out the claim under rule 37 for not being actively pursued; the extracted text does not separately address the underlying unfair dismissal claim. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.