Case 2604000/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Simon Lumley v William Hill Organisation Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2604000/2020
- Decision date
- 10 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Simon Lumley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Mr Simon Lumley had been ordered to pay three deposits totalling £3,000 following a preliminary hearing held by video in the Midlands (East) Region on 20 April 2021. The deposit order was dated 9 May 2021 and sent to him on 12 May 2021. The reasons state that the last date for payment was either 31 May 2021 or 3 June 2021.
Mr Lumley did not pay any of the deposits by either date, or at all. Because the deposit orders covered the whole of the claimant's remaining claim, the tribunal struck out that claim under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing fixed for January 2022 was vacated and did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The claim was part of the claimant's remaining claim covered by the deposit orders, but the reasons do not split the strike-out by claim type. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was part of the claimant's remaining claim covered by the deposit orders, but the reasons do not split the strike-out by claim type. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.