Case 6006814/2024 · Employment Tribunal
gloria (ruiz flores) v Hovat Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6006814/2024
- Decision date
- 24 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Liz Ord
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
gloria (ruiz flores)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent applied under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 to strike out the claimant's case on the grounds that the claimant had conducted the proceedings in an unreasonable and vexatious manner. The judgment records repeated correspondence and applications by the claimant challenging the respondent's solicitor's authority to act, making allegations of fraud and bad faith, refusing tribunal correspondence, and continuing to contact the respondent directly despite tribunal directions and warnings.
The tribunal noted that earlier judges had dismissed objections to the respondent's solicitor acting, refused the claimant's applications for default judgment or strike out, and warned the claimant that further correspondence in the same vein could lead to strike out. At the preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Ord found that the claimant had conducted the proceedings in an unreasonable and vexatious manner and, after considering proportionality and discretion, struck out the entirety of the claimant's claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out in their entirety; it does not adjudicate the merits of this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The gov.uk listing category identifies age discrimination; the judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out in their entirety and does not adjudicate the merits. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The gov.uk listing category identifies race discrimination; the judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out in their entirety and does not adjudicate the merits. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The gov.uk listing category identifies religion or belief discrimination; the judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out in their entirety and does not adjudicate the merits. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Whistleblowing | The gov.uk listing category identifies public interest disclosure; the judgment states that the claimant's claims were struck out in their entirety and does not adjudicate the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- HM Prison Service v Dolby [2003] IRLR 694
- Hassan v Tesco Stores Ltd UKEAT/0098/16
- two-stage test for strike 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.