Case 6012642/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Orr v Marks and Spencer plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012642/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Orr
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a reserved judgment on preliminary matters, including the claimant's application to amend, the respondent's application for strike out or deposit orders, and case management. The tribunal rejected the application to amend in its entirety.
The tribunal struck out the age discrimination, age-related harassment, sex discrimination, sex-related harassment, victimisation, most unauthorised deduction of wages allegations, and constructive dismissal claim on the basis that they had no reasonable prospect of success. In relation to constructive dismissal, the tribunal considered the pleaded matters, including the surviving overtime allegation, and concluded that even taken at their highest they had no reasonable prospect of amounting to a fundamental breach of contract.
The tribunal did not strike out the whistleblowing claim or the unauthorised deduction allegation concerning alleged underpayment for 15.2 hours of overtime between November 2023 and March 2024. It also rejected the respondent's application for deposit orders in relation to those surviving matters.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment states that the age discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out in its entirety. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that harassment related to age had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out in its entirety. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the sex discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out in its entirety. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that harassment related to sex had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out in its entirety. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the victimisation claim had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out in its entirety. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The allegations at paragraphs 8.2.2 to 8.2.6 of the July List of Issues were struck out. The allegation at paragraph 8.2.1, concerning alleged underpayment for 15.2 hours of overtime between November 2023 and March 2024, was not struck out and remains to be determined. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA 1997 ICR 606
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.