Case 6031637/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Keira Foster v Gloden Limited (in administration) — 2026
- Case reference
- 6031637/2025
- Decision date
- 12 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Winfield Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Keira Foster
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningKeira Foster presented claims against Gloden Limited (In Administration) on 27 August 2025 for redundancy pay, notice pay, holiday pay and arrears of pay. The Tribunal recorded that it received no correspondence from the claimant after the ET1 was presented, including no reply when it asked whether she accepted the Secretary of State's offered sum in respect of the outstanding claims.
The claimant did not respond when the Tribunal confirmed the hearing arrangements, could not be reached by the clerk on the hearing date and did not attend the listed hearing. Employment Judge Winfield found that the claims had not been actively pursued and that the grounds for striking them out under Rule 38 applied. The judge also found that striking out was consistent with the overriding objective in Rule 3. All four claims were struck out, and no monetary award was made or recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The ET1 claim for notice pay is classified as breach of contract. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The ET1 claim for arrears of pay is classified as unlawful deduction from wages. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules
- 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.