Case 6002668/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Connor v AMW Contractors UK Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002668/2025
- Decision date
- 3 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Connor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningA preliminary hearing for case management was listed by telephone on 21 November 2025. The Claimant did not attend. Shortly before the hearing, the Respondent's solicitor received a message from the Claimant saying that she wanted the case closed and that she had left the UK for her own safety and wellbeing after verbal threats. The Tribunal administration then tried to confirm whether she was withdrawing her claims, and a staff member also attempted to contact her on the phone number in the claim form, but there was no reply and no contact was made.
The Tribunal noted that the Claimant had not written to the Tribunal itself, because her message had been sent to the Respondent's solicitor. By a case management order dated 21 November 2025, she was warned that strike out was being considered because the claim was no longer being actively pursued, and she was given until 28 November 2025 either to oppose strike out or to confirm withdrawal. She did not respond. The Tribunal found that she was not actively pursuing her claim and struck it out under rule 38(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records only that the claim was struck out; it does not identify the underlying substantive causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38(1)(d)
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.