In person For the v Respondent — 2025

The claimant, Miss J Hughes, brought a redundancy payment claim against Tesco Stores Limited after being employed from 11 December 2001 to 16 March 2024. She said the redundancy process had not been properly explained and, in her ET1, that she had lost about £5,000 by deferring redundancy and continuing to work on a fixed-term contract. The respondent defended the claim, set out the statutory and enhanced payments that had been made, and applied for strike out and/or a deposit order.

The tribunal struck the claim out under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the basis that it had no reasonable prospects of success. The judge said it was not clear what legal claim the claimant was seeking to advance, given that she had received both the statutory redundancy payment and the respondent's enhanced payment. The tribunal also said there was no evidence that the amount had ever been approximately £30,000.

The tribunal relied on the fact that the claimant had signed to confirm her acceptance of the deferment arrangements and her understanding of the letter, including the later letter extending her employment to 28 April 2024 on the same terms. Although the tribunal accepted that she was off sick at the time, it said that if she had any doubt she should have referred back to the respondent or taken independent advice. Had the claim not been struck out, the tribunal said it would have considered a deposit order under rule 40 because the claim had little reasonable prospect of success, but it could not assess an appropriate deposit because the claimant did not return to the hearing.