Miss C Dodson v Intu Lakeside: 3201168/2017
REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 21 December 2017 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out because the claimant had not complied with Rule 29. the claimant had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 21 December 2017. it has not been actively pursued.[2]The claimant has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why this should not be done or to request a hearing. The claim is therefore struck out.[3]The hearing fixed for 1 February 2018 will not take place. Case No:«case_no_year» 6.2 Strike out Judgment – claim - rule 37 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss C Dodson Respondent: Intu Lakeside[1]By a letter dated 21 December 2017 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out because• the claimant had not complied with Rule 29.• the claimant had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 21 December 2017.• it has not been actively pursued.[2]The claimant has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why this should not be done or to request a hearing. The claim is therefore struck out.[3]The hearing fixed for 1 February 2018 will not take place.