Case 3331377/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr DS Logoja & Mrs SM Buncianu v Quality Home Care Anglia Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3331377/2018
- Decision date
- 6 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr DS Logoja & Mrs SM Buncianu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a strike-out judgment in case numbers 3331377/2018 and 3331378/2018. By letter dated 11 November 2019, the Tribunal gave the respondent an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing as to why its response should not be struck out because it had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 3 July 2019 and because the matter had not been actively pursued.
The respondent did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Employment Judge therefore struck out the response.
The judgment does not determine the underlying substantive claims. It records only the procedural consequence of strike out: the respondent remains entitled to notice of future hearings and decisions, but may participate only to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not determine the substantive claim; it strikes out the respondent's response for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 3 July 2019 and because the matter had not been actively pursued. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not determine the substantive claim; it strikes out the respondent's response for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 3 July 2019 and because the matter had not been actively pursued. | Other | — | — |
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.