Case 3313104/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Priti Sevani v Bankside Recruitment Ltd t/a Talent Analytix — 2026
- Case reference
- 3313104/2023
- Decision date
- 16 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Manley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Priti Sevani
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Priti Sevani's claim against Bankside Recruitment Ltd t/a Talent Analytix. The judgment records the claim as one for unlawful deduction from wages but makes no determination on its substantive merits.
The Tribunal had written to the claimant on 6 February 2026, warning that it was considering striking out the claim under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claim appeared not to have been actively pursued. The letter gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but she did not reply.
Employment Judge Manley was satisfied that the grounds for strike-out under Rule 38 applied and that striking out the claim accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because it had not been actively pursued; the substantive merits were not determined. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- overriding objective in Rule 3 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.