Case 6020421/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Craig Dicker v Stef Landons Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6020421/2025
- Decision date
- 14 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Craig Dicker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Rayner struck out Craig Dicker's claim against Stef Landons Ltd on 14 July 2026 under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The tribunal cited failure to comply with orders dated 27 March and 8 April 2026, failure to actively pursue the claim, and lack of jurisdiction as detailed in its correspondence of 27 March 2026.
The claimant did not reply to the warning letter, which offered an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing. The judge found that the grounds for striking out applied and that doing so accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3 because it was proportionate and saved expense. The judgment records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out the claim without identifying its underlying claim types. The substantive basis for the stated lack of jurisdiction is not set out; the judgment refers to correspondence dated 27 March 2026. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Overriding objective in Rule 3 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.