Case 1803600/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Sumner v Advanced Security Partners Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1803600/2020
- Decision date
- 21 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Sumner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mrs C Sumner, brought a sole claim of unfair dismissal against Advanced Security Partners Limited. After a preliminary hearing on 26 November 2020, the tribunal ordered the claimant to pay a deposit of £150.
The claimant did not pay the deposit. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records that the unfair dismissal claim was the sole claim in the proceedings.
As the claim was struck out for non-payment of the deposit, the tribunal did not determine the merits of the dismissal complaint. The hearing listed for 22 and 23 April 2021 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant was ordered to pay a deposit of £150 following a preliminary hearing on 26 November 2020, did not pay it, and the sole unfair dismissal claim was struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.