Case 6005141/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Thomas v Adecyn's Children's Home Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6005141/2025
- Decision date
- 27 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bansal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Miss C Thomas's claim against Adecyn's Children's Home Ltd. It had written to the claimant on 15 September 2025 warning that it was considering strike-out because she had not actively pursued the claim and it appeared that a fair hearing was no longer possible. The claimant had not responded to Tribunal letters dated 23 August and 5 September 2025 and had not attended the case management hearing on 15 September 2025.
The warning gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but she did not reply. Employment Judge Bansal was satisfied that the grounds for strike-out under Rule 38 applied and that strike-out accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment did not determine the substantive claim on its merits and recorded no monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment refers only to "the claim" and does not identify its substantive cause of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 strike-out grounds
- overriding objective in Rule 3
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.