CDS (Superstores International) Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant's claim was struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 after the claimant failed to respond to a warning letter. The tribunal found that the manner of conducting proceedings was vexatious, the claimant had not complied with previous orders, had not actively pursued the claim, and had failed to provide necessary information for a fair hearing.

The tribunal struck out the claim because the claimant's conduct was scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious, had failed to comply with tribunal orders dated 14 August 2025 and 17 December 2025, had not actively pursued the claim, and had failed to provide relevant information necessary for a fair hearing. The claimant did not respond to the tribunal's warning letter giving an opportunity to explain or request a hearing.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious conduct of proceedings
• •Non-compliance with tribunal orders dated 14 August 2025 and 17 December 2025
• •Failure to actively pursue the claim
• •Failure to provide relevant information necessary for fair hearing

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Robert Austin Taylor Respondent: CDS (Superstores International) Limited JUDGMENT The claim is struck out. REASONS 1. The Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 7 May 2026 warning them that the Tribunal was considering striking out the claim. This was because it appeared to the Tribunal, applying Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, that • the manner in which the proceedings were being conducted by or on behalf of the claimant was scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious; • the claimant had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 14 August 2025 and 17 December 2025; • the claim had not been actively pursued; • it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing of the claim, because you have failed to provide relevant information which the respondent needs to understand in order to defend the claim. 2. The letter gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing at which to do so. The claimant has not replied. 3. I am satisfied that the grounds for striking out the claim under Rule 38 apply, and that it would be in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3 to strike out the claim. 4. The claim is therefore struck out. 5. The hearing on 19 May 2026 will not take place. Approved by: Employment Judge Broughton 14 May 2026