Cases6010472/2025

Claimant v Castlefield Hospitality Limited

7 October 2025Before Employment Judge Bensonon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out under Rules 38(1)(c) and (d) because the claimant failed to comply with the Tribunal's order dated 9 April 2025 and did not actively pursue the complaint. The claimant was given the opportunity to object to the proposed strike-out but made no representations.

Facts

Mr Chowdhury brought a claim against Castlefield Hospitality Limited. The Tribunal made an order on 9 April 2025 which the claimant failed to comply with. On 31 July 2025, the Tribunal proposed to strike out the claim and gave the claimant an opportunity to object. The claimant made no representations in response to the proposed strike-out.

Decision

Employment Judge Benson struck out all complaints under Rules 38(1)(c) and (d) because the claimant failed to comply with the Tribunal's order and had not actively pursued the complaints. The claimant was given an opportunity to object but made no representations.

Practical note

Claimants must comply with tribunal orders and actively pursue their claims, or risk strike-out even after being given an opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should continue.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunal Rules 38(1)(c)Employment Tribunal Rules 38(1)(d)

Case details

Case number
6010472/2025
Decision date
7 October 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
hospitality
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No