Case 1800662/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Gregson v Nexus Leeds Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1800662/2022
- Decision date
- 22 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Gregson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim because Mr R Gregson did not pay the £5.00 deposit ordered following a preliminary hearing on 28 July 2022. The order was sent on 29 July 2022 and the deadline for payment was 26 August 2022.
Mr Gregson wrote to the tribunal on 31 August 2022 asking for more time to pay, but that application was made after the payment date had passed. The tribunal recorded that no reasons had been advanced as to why the small deposit could not have been paid earlier.
On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing listed for 5 January 2023 was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claimant was ordered to pay a £5 deposit after a preliminary hearing on 28 July 2022, but did not pay by the deadline of 26 August 2022. The claimant's late request for more time, sent on 31 August 2022, was after the date for payment and did not advance reasons why the deposit could not have been paid earlier. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.