Case 3314192/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Claimant v Arora Management Services Ltd and Heathrow Hotel Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 3314192/2019
Decision date: 16 September 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Skehan

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Respondent

Arora Management Services Ltd and Heathrow Hotel Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal, sitting alone, determined the matter on papers. It struck out and dismissed the claimant’s claim relating to breach of regulation 6 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, which concerned the length of night work, because the claimant had not paid the Deposit Order.

The tribunal also struck out and dismissed the claimant’s personal injury claim arising from the Working Time Regulations 1998 for the same reason. The order expressly states that the remainder of the claimant’s claims were to proceed unaffected by this order.

No monetary award was made in this decision.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Working time regulations	Claim relating to breach of regulation 6 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, concerning the length of night work, was struck out and dismissed because the claimant had not paid the Deposit Order.	Struck out	—	—
Other	Personal injury claim arising from the Working Time Regulations 1998 was struck out and dismissed because the claimant had not paid the Deposit Order.	Struck out	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.