Ms J Montague v DSTBTD Ltd — 2026

This was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Ahmed sitting alone on 21 January 2026. No oral evidence was taken and the decision on the Respondent's application was made on submissions only. The hearing dealt with the Claimant's application to amend the claim, the Respondent's application to strike out the claim or for a deposit order, and the Claimant's application for an unless order. The judge recorded that an earlier case management order of 25 April 2025 had required further information about the automatic unfair dismissal complaint and had included a strike-out warning.

The Claimant withdrew her application for an unless order. The application to amend was described as being intended to withdraw the pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaint and add indirect sex discrimination instead, but it was not then being pursued and was dismissed. The judge also noted that the alleged comments said to have been made by Employment Judge Brewer were not in the order and were irrelevant to the applications being decided.

The Respondent's strike out/deposit application was refused. The tribunal applied Rule 38 and Rule 40 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 and referred to James v Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd on proportionality. It accepted there had been non-compliance with the earlier order, but found the breach was relatively minor, the delay was short, there was no prejudice to the Respondent because the information sought related to the pregnancy and maternity complaint that had since been withdrawn, and a fair hearing remained possible. The tribunal did not find that the Claimant or her representative had acted scandalously or unreasonably, and no strike out or deposit order was made.