Case 1303735/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Mallon v Probe UK Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1303735/2023
- Decision date
- 20 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Mallon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 21 August 2024, the tribunal ordered the claimant to pay a total deposit of £150 in respect of three disability discrimination claims: direct disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and discrimination arising from disability. The order was sent to the claimant on 29 August 2024.
The claimant did not pay the deposit. The tribunal therefore struck out the claims under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The final hearing listed for 18 to 20 November 2024 did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim. A deposit of £50 was ordered as a condition of continuing this claim, but the claimant failed to pay. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments claim. A deposit of £50 was ordered as a condition of continuing this claim, but the claimant failed to pay. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability claim. A deposit of £50 was ordered as a condition of continuing this claim, but the claimant failed to pay. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunal 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.