Case 6019065/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T La v Lewisham Refugee and Migrant Network — 2026
- Case reference
- 6019065/2024
- Decision date
- 31 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms T La
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Ms T La's claim against Lewisham Refugee and Migrant Network. It did so under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 after concluding that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 25 February 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The Tribunal recorded that it wrote to the claimant on 30 August 2025 warning that strike out was under consideration. The claimant had also not replied to the Tribunal's letters of 23 December 2024 and 25 June 2025. The warning letter gave an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but no response was received.
Employment Judge Lumby was satisfied that the grounds for strike out applied and that strike out was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3 because the claimant was not actively pursuing the claim. The judgment states that the hearing listed for 26 to 29 May 2026 will not take place.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment strikes out the claim under Rule 38 but does not separate findings between individual causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment strikes out the claim under Rule 38 but does not separate findings between individual causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 3 overriding objective
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.