Case 2300784/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Paterson v Sky UK Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300784/2019
- Decision date
- 1 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Paterson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37. It had written to the claimant on 3 June 2020 giving an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about why the claim should not be struck out.
The reasons given were that the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order dated 14 October 2019 and that the claim had not been actively pursued. The claimant failed to make written representations, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The hearing fixed for 15 October 2020 was therefore vacated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment itself states only that "the claim" was struck out; this claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, not separately described in the judgment text. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment itself states only that "the claim" was struck out; this claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, not separately described in the judgment text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment itself states only that "the claim" was struck out; this claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, not separately described in the judgment text. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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.