Case 1805542/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Gorvin v Milton Portfolio Op Co 3 Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805542/2021
- Decision date
- 14 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Gorvin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 14 February 2022, the claimant was ordered to pay a deposit of £25.00. The order was sent to the claimant on 22 February 2022, and the tribunal recorded that the deposit was paid but was received on 10 March 2022, after the 14-day time limit set out in the order.
Because the deposit was not received within the time limit, the tribunal struck out the claim under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records that the hearing fixed for 27 April 2022 would not take place and contains no merits determination or monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not record separate merits findings; it strikes out the claim under rule 39(4) because the £25 deposit, although paid, was received after the 14-day deadline in the order. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not record separate merits findings; it strikes out the claim under rule 39(4) because the £25 deposit, although paid, was received after the 14-day deadline in the order. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.