GFTU Emplaw Emplaw Emplaw

Sharma v New College Nottingham - Deposit should not be ordered where central core of facts is in dispute [2011] EAT

An employment tribunal should approach the question of ordering a deposit for a claim to continue in the same was as it would striking it out completely: if there is a disputed central core of facts the matter should proceed to a full hearing without such an order, which is "serious and potentially fatal" to a claim.

Mr Sharma brought an employment tribunal claim for race discrimination. It was very vague, promising details in due course; the College, however, clearly had an idea of what at least some of the claim related to and lodged a reasonably detailed Response on that point: as for the rest it pleaded that it had too little information to reply. The tribunal ordered a Pre-Hearing Review (PHR) to consider strike out on the grounds of no reasonable prospects of success, or ordering a deposit. This however was postponed and at a Case Management Discussion Mr Sharma was order to provide particulars of his claim.

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.