Oakley’s Coachbuilders

Case Summary

The claimant's employment tribunal claim against Oakley's Coachbuilders was struck out for non-compliance with a tribunal order dated 22 September 2025 and failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant did not respond to a warning letter dated 9 March 2026 providing an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out.

The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to comply with the tribunal's order dated 22 September 2025 and had not actively pursued the claim. The claimant did not respond to the tribunal's warning letter giving them an opportunity to show cause against strike-out.

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

• •non-compliance with tribunal order dated 22 September 2025
• •claim not actively pursued

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Daniel Valentine Respondent: Oakley’s coachbuilders JUDGMENT The claim is struck out. REASONS 1. The Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 9 March 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 claimant had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 22 September 2025;  the claim had not been actively pursued; 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. The claim is therefore struck out. 4. The hearing on 1 April 2026 and 10-13 August 2026 will not take place. Approved by: Regional Employment Judge Foxwell Date: 31 March 2026 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 31 March 2026 ..................................................................... FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE