Case 2408785/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr E Ben Ali v Activate Group Ltd — 2024

Case reference: 2408785/2022
Decision date: 5 February 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Eeley Representation
Venue: By CVP

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr E Ben Ali

Respondent

Activate Group Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a CVP hearing on 29 January 2024 before Employment Judge Eeley, the respondent applied to strike out the claimant's claims under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success. The respondent also applied for a deposit order under rule 39. The tribunal refused both applications.

The judgment does not determine the substantive merits of the claimant's claims. It instead leaves the case listed for final hearing between 28 and 30 October 2024 and extends the deadline for exchange of witness statements to 15 March 2024. The written record also notes that the reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note to the judgment.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The judgment only determines the respondent's interim applications. It refuses strike out under rule 37(1)(a) and refuses a deposit order under rule 39, but it does not decide the substantive claims.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.