Case 6003875/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Daniel Valentine v Oakley’s coachbuilders — 2026
- Case reference
- 6003875/2025
- Decision date
- 31 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Daniel Valentine
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 9 March 2026 warning that it was considering striking out the claim under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The stated reasons were that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 22 September 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The letter gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing for that purpose. The claimant did not reply. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim.
As a result, the hearings listed for 1 April 2026 and 10 to 13 August 2026 will not take place. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying complaint, and it records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying claim type(s); it states only that 'the claim is struck out' under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.