Case 3332608/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs E Darling v The Entertainment Department UK Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 3332608/2018
Decision date: 4 June 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ord Appearances
Venue: Huntingdon

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs E Darling

Respondent

The Entertainment Department UK Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

On 30 May 2019, Employment Judge Ord considered the respondent's application to set aside the judgment that had been entered on 14 February 2019 on the basis that no response had been filed. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had in fact emailed a response on 17 January 2019, but it had not reached the file when Employment Judge Moore considered the matter.

The judge found that the judgment had been wrongly entered because the respondent had submitted a response. In the interests of justice, the judgment was set aside and the respondent's response was accepted as the response to the claimant's claim.

This decision did not determine the underlying discrimination or unfair dismissal claims on their merits. Its effect was procedural only, allowing the case to proceed as defended.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The tribunal granted the respondent's application to set aside the judgment entered on 14 February 2019 and accepted the response submitted on 17 January 2019 as the respondent's response. No substantive merits determination of the underlying claims was made in this decision.	Upheld	—	—

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.

Published on gov.uk under the .

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.