Case 6004129/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Exley v Prydis Legal — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004129/2024
- Decision date
- 23 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Exley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 30 April 2025, the tribunal gave Mr S Exley an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about why the claim should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that he had not complied with the tribunal's order dated 13 January 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
Mr Exley did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(d) on the basis that it had not been actively pursued.
The judgment records that the decision was approved by Employment Judge Woodhead Date on 9 June 2025 and sent to the parties on 23 June 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying legal claim(s); it states only that the claim was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunal 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.