Cases3305782/2024

Claimant v Maritime Transport Limited

25 February 2025Before Employment Judge GrahamLondon Easton papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out under Rule 38(c) and 38(d) for failure to comply with the Tribunal Order dated 1 November 2024 and for failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant provided no satisfactory explanation for non-compliance and did not propose any timeframe for future compliance.

Facts

Mr Vasile brought a claim against Maritime Transport Ltd. The Tribunal issued an Order on 1 November 2024 requiring the claimant to take certain steps. On 4 February 2025, the Tribunal wrote to the claimant warning that the claim might be struck out for non-compliance with the Order and for failing to actively pursue the claim. The claimant replied on 4 February 2025 but provided no satisfactory explanation for the failures and did not request a hearing.

Decision

Employment Judge Graham struck out the claim under Rules 38(c) and 38(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. The claimant failed to comply with a previous tribunal order, failed to actively pursue the claim, provided no satisfactory explanation, proposed no timeframe for future compliance, and continued to take no steps to advance the claim.

Practical note

Claimants must comply with tribunal orders and actively pursue their claims; failure to do so without satisfactory explanation will result in strike-out under Rules 38(c) and 38(d).

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 38(c)Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 38(d)

Case details

Case number
3305782/2024
Decision date
25 February 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
transport
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No