Miss A Madden v Home Office — 2025

The hearing considered the respondent's application for an extension of time to submit its response, an application to strike out the claim, an application for a deposit order, and case management matters. The claimant did not attend and could not be contacted using the details provided. The tribunal granted the respondent an extension of time for its response, finding no apparent prejudice to the claimant from the eight-day delay and noting that a potentially meritorious defence had been entered.

The tribunal found that the only claim brought was unfair dismissal, as that was the only box ticked on the claim form. On the claimant's own dates, she was employed from 29 August 2023 to 16 December 2024, so she did not have the two years' service required for an ordinary unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found nothing in the claim form indicating that an automatic unfair dismissal claim was being pursued.

The tribunal also considered whether the claim form indicated another claim, including disability discrimination, but accepted the respondent's submission that it did not "shout out" any such claim. It concluded that the unfair dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out under rule 38(1)(a).