Case 6005877/2024 · Employment Tribunal
N Mzungwana v Biffa Waste Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6005877/2024
- Decision date
- 27 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Battisby
Parties
2 namedClaimant
N Mzungwana
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that by letter dated 20 February 2025 the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated reasons were that the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders dated 4 February 2025 and 20 February 2025, and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The hearing listed for 28 February 2025 was vacated and did not take place. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Battisby on 27 February 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not identify the underlying cause(s) of action. The tribunal struck out the claim after the claimant failed to make sufficient representations in response to the 20 February 2025 letter, which said the claim had not complied with tribunal orders dated 4 and 20 February 2025 and had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.