Case 6036245/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Lucas Sharp v Newsteam Group Ltd. — 2026

Case reference: 6036245/2025
Decision date: 11 June 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Bax

Indexed: 10 July 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Lucas Sharp

Respondent

Newsteam Group Ltd.

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal struck out Lucas Sharp's claim against NewsTeam Group Ltd pursuant to Rule 38(1)(d). The judgment records that the Tribunal had written to the claimant on 24 April 2026 warning that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared that the claimant had not complied with Tribunal Orders dated 1 March 2026, the Notice of Hearing dated 17 March 2026, and Employment Judge Bax's directions dated 7 April 2026.

The Tribunal found that the claim had not been actively pursued and that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing to do so, but had not replied by 1 May 2026.

Employment Judge Woodhead was satisfied that the grounds for striking out under Rule 38 applied and that striking out the claim was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The claim was therefore struck out, the hearing listed for 19 June 2026 was vacated, and no remedy was awarded.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment identifies the claim as struck out but does not set out the substantive wages issue; the claim type is taken from the supplied gov.uk listing category.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.