Case 6008747/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Patrick v 1PWRR British Army On The Papers — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008747/2024
- Decision date
- 22 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer On
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Patrick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the matter on the papers before Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer on 22 September 2025. It recorded that the claim was struck out because it was not being actively pursued and had no reasonable prospects of success.
In its reasons, the tribunal said the respondent considered the claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claimant's complaint. The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 17 December 2024, giving until 14 January 2025 to make representations to avoid strike out. The claimant did not respond.
The reasons also record that the respondent wrote to the Tribunal in June 2025 and September 2025 asking for the claim to be struck out, and the claimant did not respond to those letters. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim and also apologised for the length of time taken to respond to the respondent's correspondence in 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying cause(s) of action; it refers only to 'the claim'. It was struck out because it was not being actively pursued and had no reasonable prospects of success, with the respondent having raised a jurisdiction point. | 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.