Claimant v Serena Rutherford
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim against the third named respondent (Borders Direct Payment Agency trading as Encompass) was struck out because the claimant failed to pay the deposit order of £90 by the specified date of 6 November 2024, despite paying it later on 3 January 2025. Rule 40(4) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 mandates strike-out for failure to pay a deposit by the specified date.
Facts
The claimant brought claims against multiple respondents including Borders Direct Payment Agency trading as Encompass (the third named respondent). Following a Tribunal Determination on 31 July 2024, a deposit order of £90 was made on 22 August 2024 requiring payment by 6 November 2024 for the claim to proceed against the third respondent. The claimant failed to pay by this deadline, only paying on 3 January 2025.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claim against the third named respondent because the claimant failed to pay the £90 deposit by the specified deadline of 6 November 2024. Rule 40(4) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 mandates automatic strike-out in such circumstances, regardless of subsequent late payment.
Practical note
Deposit orders must be paid by the exact deadline specified—late payment, even if made before the judgment, will result in automatic strike-out under Rule 40(4) with no discretion for the tribunal to accept late payment.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 4103007/2023
- Decision date
- 10 February 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No