Case 2207806/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Coats v Ms E Browne and 2 others — 2020
- Case reference
- 2207806/2017
- Decision date
- 20 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lewis Date
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms L Coats
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a reconsideration judgment, not a substantive liability decision. The claimant applied for reconsideration of the 10 October 2018 judgment striking out the spin-off claim after a £1,000 deposit order made at a preliminary hearing on 23 August 2018. The order was sent on 29 August 2018, and the claimant did not pay the deposit by the date specified, so the claim was struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Employment Judge Lewis Date held that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked and that reconsideration was not in the interests of justice. The judgment records that five reasons had supported the original deposit order, that the question about whether the respondents retained rights under their contracts was only one of those reasons, and that no fact-finding had been made on that point. The claimant could have taken further steps to obtain evidence, including disclosure or witness evidence from Mr Bocquelet, but the tribunal found the later reliance on the Bocquelet podcast to be far from conclusive. The application for reconsideration was therefore refused, and the judge noted that administrative delay did not affect the reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Application for reconsideration of the 10 October 2018 strike-out of the spin-off claim was refused; the tribunal did not re-determine the underlying claim on its merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 70
- rule 39(4) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 29
- CPR relief from sanction
- interests of justice
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.