Case 3308087/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Samantha Palihakkara v NEC Software Solutions UK Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3308087/2023
- Decision date
- 21 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Young Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Samantha Palihakkara
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in public before Employment Judge Young on 8 February 2024. The judgment records that the Claimant was represented by herself and the Respondent by counsel. The written record was sent to the parties on 21 February 2024, and the notes state that reasons were given orally and would not be provided in writing unless requested within 14 days.
The tribunal struck out the complaints of wrongful dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages, the latter being described as relating to the Claimant’s professional subscription. It did so under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that those complaints had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment states that those complaints were dismissed.
The Claimant’s breach of contract complaint, which related to private medical expenses, was not finally determined at this hearing. Instead, the tribunal made a deposit order in relation to that complaint. The Respondent’s application for costs was refused. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the complaint had no reasonable prospect of success; the judgment says the complaint was dismissed. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint in respect of the Claimant’s professional subscription was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success; the judgment says the complaint was dismissed. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The complaint in respect of private medical expenses was made the subject of a deposit order at this preliminary hearing; the judgment does not record a final liability outcome. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a)
- no 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.