Case 6012419/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs F Muchabaiwa v Lightcare Services — 2026
- Case reference
- 6012419/2025
- Decision date
- 15 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs F Muchabaiwa
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment states that the Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 15 January 2026 warning that it was considering striking out the claim. The warning was given because it appeared to the Tribunal, applying Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 23 September 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing, but did not reply. Employment Judge Woodhead was satisfied that the grounds for striking out the claim under Rule 38 applied and that striking out the claim would accord with the overriding objective in Rule 3.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claim was struck out under Rule 38 because the claimant had not complied with a Tribunal order and the claim had not been actively pursued. The short judgment does not provide further particulars of the wages claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.