Case 3303536/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Mohammed v Tesco Stores Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303536/2020
- Decision date
- 27 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bloch QC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Mohammed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing on 16 June 2021 before Employment Judge Bloch QC sitting alone. The respondent applied to strike out the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint under Rule 37, relying on an alleged 14 October 2019 telephone call to an IT helpdesk in which the caller was said to have used abusive racist language. The tribunal could not listen to the recordings because of incompatibility of IT equipment, but it considered the surrounding material, including the respondent's evidence that the calls came from the claimant's mobile number, that the caller gave the claimant's employee number, and that managers thought the voice on the recording sounded like the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | At this preliminary hearing the tribunal refused the respondent's Rule 37 strike-out application, but upheld a Rule 39 deposit order and ordered the claimant to pay £75 by 11 August 2021 as a condition of continuing to advance the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal did not determine the merits of the unfair dismissal claim. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37 strike out
- Rule 39 deposit order
- little reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.