Case 1300897/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Comer v Sanctuary Maintenance Contractors Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1300897/2021
- Decision date
- 26 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woffenden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Comer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal ordered the claimant to pay a deposit of £450 following a preliminary hearing held on 17 March 2022. The order was sent to the claimant on 23 March 2022, but the claimant did not pay the deposit.
Because the deposit was not paid, the tribunal struck out the listed complaints under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The struck-out complaints were constructive unfair dismissal and two complaints of direct disability discrimination: one concerning being told to work security duties in alleged contravention of the claimant's contract, and one concerning being refused furlough after his operation.
The judgment records that the case remained listed for 17 to 24 March 2023 to deal with the remaining claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the claimant failed to pay the £450 deposit ordered after the preliminary hearing on 17 March 2022. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination complaint alleging the claimant was told to work security duties in alleged contravention of his contract. Struck out under rule 39(4) after non-payment of the £450 deposit. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination complaint alleging refusal of furlough after the claimant's operation. Struck out under rule 39(4) after non-payment of the £450 deposit. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.