Case 6022068/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Tiffany-Leigh Harold v Nothingless Photography Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6022068/2024
- Decision date
- 21 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Tiffany-Leigh Harold
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningTiffany-Leigh Harold's claim against Nothingless Photography Ltd was struck out. The Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 19 March 2026 warning that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared that the claim had not been actively pursued. The letter gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should continue or to request a hearing. The claimant did not reply.
Employment Judge Bright found that the grounds for strike-out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that striking out the claim accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment was approved on 21 July 2026. It does not identify the substantive claim type or record a monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type. The claim was struck out because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 3 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 (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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.