Case 6022992/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Bullen v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6022992/2024
- Decision date
- 8 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Bullen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had asked the parties how the apparent duplication between case numbers 6022992/2024 and 6005002/2025 should be resolved. The claimant did not respond. The respondent asked for the claims to be heard together and for its strike out application, or alternatively a deposit order application, to be considered.
The Tribunal ordered the claims to be heard together and required the claimant to respond to the strike out application. No response was received. The Tribunal then warned the claimant that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared not to have been actively pursued, and gave an opportunity to explain or request a hearing. The claimant did not reply.
Employment Judge Bax was satisfied that Rule 38 grounds applied and that striking out the claim was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The claim was struck out and the listed final hearing was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claims were struck out because they had not been actively pursued. It does not adjudicate the merits of the unfair dismissal claim. | 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.