Deposit order non-compliance: discrimination claim struck out after 16 years' service
A kitchen assistant with 16 years' service had her disability discrimination claim struck out after failing to comply with a deposit order. The tribunal found no reasonable excuse for non-payment.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a Kitchen Assistant/Relief Cook from 22 November 2002 until her dismissal by reason of redundancy on 6 March 2019.
- The claimant suffers from shoulder pain from a 2006 road traffic accident, accepted as a disability, and also has dyspraxia.
- The claimant's claims were initially struck out as out of time, but on appeal the discrimination claims were allowed to proceed.
- After multiple amendments and preliminary hearings, the remaining claims were subject to a deposit order of £10 per allegation.
- The claimant failed to comply with the deposit order and did not make representations, leading to the strike out of the entire claim.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as a Kitchen Assistant/Relief Cook.
-
Road traffic accident
Claimant suffered shoulder injury in a road traffic accident, leading to disability.
-
Dismissal by redundancy
Claimant's employment terminated by reason of redundancy.
-
ACAS early conciliation started
Claimant commenced ACAS early conciliation.
-
ACAS certificate issued
Early Conciliation Certificate issued.
-
First claim submission (invalid)
Claimant submitted claim by email from Uganda, rejected as invalid method.
-
Second claim submission (invalid)
Claimant submitted claim form without correct ACAS number, returned as invalid.
-
Claim accepted
Claim accepted by Tribunal after adding correct ACAS number.
-
First preliminary hearing
EJ Truscott struck out all claims as out of time.
-
Second preliminary hearing
EJ Truscott allowed discrimination claims to proceed as just and equitable.
-
Amendment hearing
EJ Barker allowed amendments for age and disability discrimination, refused sex and race.
-
Strike out and deposit order
EJ Wright struck out most claims, imposed deposit order on remaining six allegations.
-
Final strike out
Claim struck out for non-compliance with deposit order.
The legal issue
Whether the tribunal should strike out a discrimination claim where the claimant failed to comply with a deposit order requiring payment of £10 per allegation (total £60) as a condition of proceeding.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the entire claim for non-compliance with the deposit order.
- The claimant had been ordered to pay a deposit of £10 per remaining allegation (6 allegations, total £60) by 19 October 2022.
- She did not pay and made no representations to the tribunal.
- The tribunal concluded that the non-compliance was deliberate and without reasonable excuse.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed in its entirety.
Lessons & takeaways
- Deposit orders are serious: if you do not pay or apply for a variation, your claim can be struck out without a hearing.
- If you cannot afford a deposit, you must tell the tribunal and ask for a review or extension — silence is not an option.
- Even if your claim has survived earlier strike-out hearings, you must follow all procedural orders to keep it alive.
A long service, a redundancy, and a procedural end
This case began with a kitchen assistant who had worked for Thames Reach Charity for 16 years. She was made redundant in March 2019 and brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination. After a series of preliminary hearings, most of her claims were struck out as out of time. However, she was allowed to proceed with six allegations of disability and age discrimination.
At a hearing in September 2022, the tribunal considered whether those remaining allegations had any reasonable prospect of success. It decided that they did not, but instead of striking them out immediately, it imposed a deposit order. The claimant was required to pay £10 per allegation — a total of £60 — by 19 October 2022. She was warned that failure to pay would result in the claim being struck out.
What went wrong
The claimant did not pay the deposit. She did not ask for more time, and she did not explain why she could not pay. The tribunal noted that she had been represented by a friend at earlier hearings and had been able to engage with the process. There was no evidence of any barrier — such as her disability — that prevented her from complying.
Employment Judge McLaren, who made the final strike-out decision, found that the non-compliance was deliberate and without reasonable excuse. The claim was therefore struck out in its entirety. The case never reached a full hearing on the merits.
What this means for similar claims
Deposit orders are a tool tribunals use to filter out claims that appear weak. They are not common, but when they are made, they must be taken seriously. If you receive a deposit order, you have two options: pay it, or apply to the tribunal to vary or revoke it. Doing nothing will almost certainly end your case.
This case also shows how procedural steps can derail a claim even when the underlying facts might have some merit. The claimant had already survived an appeal against a strike-out for being out of time. But once the deposit order was made, the failure to comply was fatal.
Similar cases
Strike-out and deposit order: a mixed outcome for former employee with osteoarthritis
A former employee with osteoarthritis faced strike-out of one harassment claim but was allowed to proceed with others, including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, after a preliminary hearing.
Claim struck out after employee failed to provide disability impact statement
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims were struck out after he repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders to provide a disability impact statement, and did not attend any hearings.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.
Claims struck out after former employee fails to attend hearing or comply with orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims have been struck out after he failed to attend a preliminary hearing and did not comply with tribunal orders to provide evidence.