Case 1802931/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Khan v Next Distribution Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802931/2022
- Decision date
- 24 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Khan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had made a Deposit Order, sent to the parties on 02 September, requiring the claimant to pay a deposit as a condition of continuing her allegations of harassment or direct discrimination because of or related to religion or belief.
The claimant failed to pay the ordered deposit. The Tribunal therefore struck out those religion or belief complaints. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining allegations of disability-related harassment or discrimination remained subject to case management.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment states that complaints of direct discrimination because of or related to religion or belief were struck out after the claimant failed to pay a deposit ordered as a condition of continuing those allegations. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that complaints of harassment because of or related to religion or belief were struck out after the claimant failed to pay a deposit ordered as a condition of continuing those allegations. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.