Case 8000130/2024 · Employment Tribunal
L Cullen v MDH Recruitment Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000130/2024
- Decision date
- 20 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
L Cullen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 15 April 2024 the tribunal ordered the claimant to provide an explanation for her failure to participate in the preliminary hearing on that date and to enclose a completed copy of the agenda form sent on 16 February 2024. The orders were to be complied with by 23 April 2024, but no reply was received.
On 29 April 2024 the tribunal gave the claimant a further opportunity to provide written reasons by 13 May 2024 or to request a hearing to consider why the claim should not be struck out. No reply was received. Employment Judge D Hoey therefore struck out the claim on 16 May 2024 under rule 37(1)(c) because the claimant had not complied with the tribunal's orders or given an acceptable reason why the claim should proceed.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with tribunal orders. The merits were not determined. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with tribunal orders. The merits were not determined. | Struck out | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with tribunal orders. The merits were not determined. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with tribunal orders. The merits were not determined. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with tribunal orders. The merits were not determined. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(c)
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.