Case 3201271/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Shahzad v Dr Victoria Holt — 2021
- Case reference
- 3201271/2020
- Decision date
- 14 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Shahzad
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 9 November 2020, the Tribunal ordered the claimant to pay a deposit of £1,000 by 7 December 2020 as a condition of continuing with the claim. The claimant did not pay the deposit within the required period.
The Tribunal also recorded that the claimant made no written representations, or no sufficient written representations, explaining why the claim should not be struck out, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the claim was struck out under rule 37.
The hearing listed for five days starting on 16 February 2021 was vacated and would not take place.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The claim was struck out under rule 37 because the claimant did not pay the £1,000 deposit ordered by letter dated 9 November 2020 by the deadline of 7 December 2020, and did not make sufficient written representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was struck out under rule 37 because the claimant did not pay the £1,000 deposit ordered by letter dated 9 November 2020 by the deadline of 7 December 2020, and did not make sufficient written representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.