Case 6008667/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S M Longworth v Shannon Court Care Home Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008667/2024
- Decision date
- 21 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S M Longworth
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 22 July 2025, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out for failure to comply with the case management order issued by Employment Judge Shotter on 10 February 2025, which had been extended by agreement to 27 May 2025. The order required the claimant to supply medical evidence to the respondent.
The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. It recorded that the hearing listed for 20 to 24 April 2026 would not take place. The judgment contains no merits findings and no monetary award, and it was approved by Employment Judge Buzzard on 29 September 2025 and sent to the parties on 21 November 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claim was struck out because the claimant did not comply with the case management order requiring medical evidence; the extracted judgment does not contain separate merits findings for this claim. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out because the claimant did not comply with the case management order requiring medical evidence; the extracted judgment does not contain separate merits findings for this claim. | 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.