Case 2400799/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Amin v Manchester Airports Group plc and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400799/2022
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr H Amin
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 9 January 2024, Employment Judge Holmes considered whether claim no. 2400799/2022, brought by Mr H Amin against Manchester Airports Group PLC and Francesca Abbott, remained struck out for non-payment of deposit orders. The underlying claim referred to constructive dismissal, disability discrimination, race discrimination and victimisation. At the earlier hearing the tribunal had ordered deposits of £25 per claim for the ten claims before it, payable by 31 May 2023, and there was no record of payment.
The claimant sought a postponement because he said he was in Pakistan concerning his father's health and would not return until at least 1 March 2024. The tribunal held that the application did not comply with the Presidential Guidance on Postponements or rule 30A because it was made less than seven days before the hearing without supporting evidence, details of the travel, or evidence of any illness. The judge found that the tribunal knew too little about the circumstances to treat them as exceptional.
The postponement application was refused. In the claimant's absence, and without a signed witness statement or evidence supporting his alleged attempt to pay the deposits, the tribunal dismissed any application for relief from sanction or reconsideration of the strike out. The result was that claim no. 2400799/2022 remained struck out; no substantive merits findings or compensation award were made.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Struck out for non-payment of the deposit order; no merits determination. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out for non-payment of the deposit order; no merits determination. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Struck out for non-payment of the deposit order; no merits determination. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment refers to victimisation claims but does not separate out the underlying protected characteristic. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Presidential Guidance on Postponements
- Rule 30A
- exceptional circumstances
- overriding objective
- rule 76
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.