Case 3310923/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Sacramento v Safestay plc — 2023
- Case reference
- 3310923/2022
- Decision date
- 29 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Sacramento
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment dealt only with a strike-out issue. The claimant, Mr N Sacramento, had been ordered to pay a £300 deposit following a preliminary hearing on 23 June 2023, and the order was sent to him on 21 July 2023.
He did not pay the deposit. The tribunal therefore struck out the complaint of unlawful deduction in the period after December 2020 under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment states that all other claims will continue. It does not determine the merits of any substantive claim or record any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unlawful deductions in the period after December 2020 was struck out because the claimant was ordered to pay a £300 deposit after a preliminary hearing on 23 June 2023, the order was sent on 21 July 2023, and the deposit was not paid; the tribunal referred to rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.