Case 1802393/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Holland v A & A Coach Travel — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802393/2021
- Decision date
- 8 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Holland
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 11 March 2022, the respondent was ordered to pay a deposit of £1,000 if it wished to continue advancing the argument that the claimant did not meet the definition of a disabled person at the relevant time. The order was sent to the respondent on 15 March 2022.
The respondent did not pay the deposit. As a result, the tribunal struck out the part of the response contesting the claimant's alleged disability under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment is limited to that preliminary issue and does not determine any substantive liability or award any compensation.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | This was a preliminary issue on whether the claimant met the definition of a disabled person at the relevant time. The respondent's contention was struck out under rule 39(4) after it failed to pay the £1,000 deposit ordered at the preliminary hearing. | Other | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.