Case 1802602/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Rehman v Capital Retail Financial Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1802602/2023
- Decision date
- 15 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Rehman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 15 March 2024 the tribunal recorded that all the claims were struck out. The claimant's complaints about holiday pay and disability discrimination in relation to the condition described in the judgment as 'costa condritus' had been given an opportunity on 24 November 2023 to explain in writing why they should not be struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success, or to request a hearing. The claimant did not respond by the 15 December 2023 deadline or at all, and those complaints were struck out on that basis.
The judgment also records that on 24 November 2023 Employment Judge Wade ordered deposits to be paid as a condition of continuing with disability discrimination complaints related to dyslexia. The claimant did not pay the deposits, so those complaints were struck out pursuant to Employment Tribunal Rule 39. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Struck out after the claimant did not respond by 15 December 2023 to the 24 November 2023 order to explain why the holiday pay complaint should not be struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success, or to request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of disability discrimination in relation to the condition described in the judgment as 'costa condritus'. Struck out after no response to the 24 November 2023 show-cause order by 15 December 2023, on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of disability discrimination related to dyslexia. Deposits were ordered on 24 November 2023 as a condition of continuing with the claim, but the claimant did not pay them, so the complaint was struck out pursuant to Employment Tribunal Rule 39. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- Employment Tribunal Rule 39
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.