Default judgment revoked after employer proved response was filed on time
A default judgment against Riverside Dental Spa for maternity discrimination was revoked when the tribunal discovered the employer had in fact filed its response before the deadline. The case will now proceed to a full hearing.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #maternity-and-pregnancy-rights
- #unfair-dismissal
- #default-judgment-revoked
- #response-filed-in-time
Key facts
- The claimant alleged she was dismissed as a detriment related to her pregnancy.
- The respondent initially failed to submit a response by the deadline, leading to a default judgment.
- The respondent actually submitted their response on 21 June 2023, before the deadline.
- The default judgment was revoked upon reconsideration because the response was filed in time.
- A preliminary hearing will be listed for case management.
Timeline
-
Claim issued
The claimant issued her claim in the London South Employment Tribunal concerning allegations of pregnancy and maternity discrimination.
-
Response submitted
The respondent submitted their response to the tribunal via email, before the deadline.
-
Response deadline
The deadline for the respondent to submit a response under Rule 16.
-
Default judgment entered
Judge M Aspinall entered a default judgment against the respondent under Rule 21, as the response was not on file.
-
Reconsideration judgment
Upon discovering the response was filed in time, the judge revoked the default judgment and ordered a preliminary hearing.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to revoke a default judgment entered against the employer for failing to file a response, when it later emerged that the response had actually been filed before the deadline.
The outcome
The tribunal revoked the default judgment it had previously entered against Riverside Dental Spa. The employer had submitted its response on 21 June 2023, one day before the deadline, but this was not placed before the judge when he made the original judgment on 2 August 2023. The case will now proceed to a preliminary hearing for case management, and ultimately to a full hearing on the merits of the former employee's claim of unfair dismissal and maternity discrimination.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are an employer, always ensure your response is filed before the deadline and keep proof of submission.
- If a default judgment is entered against you, you can apply for reconsideration if you can show you filed your response in time.
- Tribunals will correct procedural errors to avoid injustice, even after a judgment has been issued.
- Claimants should be aware that a default judgment can be revoked if the employer can demonstrate they complied with the rules.
A procedural mix-up that changed the outcome
This case shows how a simple administrative error can dramatically alter the course of an employment tribunal claim. The former employee of Riverside Dental Spa alleged she was dismissed because of her pregnancy, a claim that initially appeared to succeed by default when the employer failed to file a response. But the employer had actually sent its response by email on 21 June 2023, a day before the deadline. The response was simply not placed before the judge when he made his original decision.
What the employer did right
When the default judgment was entered, the employer acted promptly to correct the mistake. It provided evidence that the response had been filed in time, and the judge accepted that allowing the default judgment to stand would cause injustice. The judgment was revoked, and the case will now be heard on its merits.
What this means for similar claims
For employees bringing discrimination claims, this case is a reminder that a default judgment is not always final. Employers who can show they complied with procedural rules may have the judgment set aside. For employers, it underscores the importance of keeping records of when and how you submit documents to the tribunal. A timely response, even if initially overlooked, can save you from a default loss.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal for lack of fair procedure: ACAS uplift awarded
A former employee was unfairly dismissed after the employer failed to follow a fair procedure. The tribunal awarded a 20% uplift for breaching the ACAS Code and confirmed one month's notice pay.
Dismissed for childcare absences: reinstatement offer saved employer from automatic unfair dismissal claim
A retail sales advisor was dismissed during probation for eight absences, five of which were for childcare. The tribunal found no automatic unfair dismissal because the employer offered reinstatement two days later, which the claimant rejected.
Pregnancy discrimination claim struck out: the importance of early conciliation
A former employee's pregnancy discrimination and unfair dismissal claim was thrown out because she lodged her claim without an Acas early conciliation certificate. The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction.
Genetic Director's constructive dismissal claim over pregnancy exclusion rejected
A Genetic Director who resigned after feeling excluded from strategic decisions during her pregnancy has lost her constructive unfair dismissal and discrimination claims. The tribunal found the employer's actions were not because of her pregnancy.