Case 6015781/2024 · Employment Tribunal
David Kalungi v Southern Wind Group Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6015781/2024
- Decision date
- 26 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Singh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
David Kalungi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that a preliminary hearing had been listed for 26 March 2025. The respondent had attempted to contact the claimant without receiving a response, and the claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing.
EJ Singh postponed the hearing and ordered the claimant to explain his non-attendance within seven days, warning that the claim risked being struck out if no sufficiently adequate explanation was provided. No response was received, and EJ Glennie later gave the claimant a further opportunity to object to strike-out by 30 July 2025.
No response was received by the tribunal or the respondent. Employment Judge Baty concluded that the claim had not been actively pursued and struck it out on that basis.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out the claim because it was not actively pursued. It does not separately adjudicate this claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim because it was not actively pursued. It does not separately adjudicate this claim type. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim because it was not actively pursued. It does not separately adjudicate this claim type. | 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.