Case 6002228/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Ali v Sterling Facilities Management (UK) Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002228/2025
- Decision date
- 11 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr A Ali's claim against Sterling Facilities Management because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant had been ordered in two letters to provide correct information about the respondent but did not respond. On 17 October 2025, the tribunal warned him that it was considering striking out the claim and gave him an opportunity to explain why it should proceed or to request a hearing. He did not reply.
Employment Judge Rayner found that the grounds for striking out the claim under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that striking it out accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment was approved on 11 December 2025. It does not identify the substantive claim types or record any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole without identifying its substantive claim type. The month in the dates of the two letters ordering correct respondent information appears as 'Amy' and is unclear. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Overriding objective in Rule 3 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.