Case 6015220/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Alan Smith v Mag Extrusions (Bath) Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6015220/2025
- Decision date
- 30 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Alan Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Alan Smith's claim against Mag Extrusions (Bath) Ltd. The judgment does not identify the pleaded cause or causes of action and records no determination on their merits.
The Tribunal had written to Mr Smith on 7 April 2026 warning that it was considering strike-out because he had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 12 February 2026 and/or had not actively pursued the claim. He 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 Smail was satisfied that the grounds for strike-out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that strike-out accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. No monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole but does not identify the pleaded cause or causes of action. The gov.uk listing categories indicate redundancy and working time, but these are not specified in the judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.