Master UK Employment Tribunal Preliminary Hearings in 2025: Essential Strategies for Small Employers to Crush Claims and Save Costs!

How to Avoid a Costly Loss

For small employers across the UK, dealing with Employment Tribunal proceedings can feel overwhelming. When an employee files a claim, the process often starts with a preliminary hearing—a stage that goes far beyond simple paperwork. This hearing gives an Employment Judge the chance to understand your case, sort out the main issues, and create a roadmap for what happens next. While facing a tribunal might seem scary, especially without a legal team, being prepared can turn this initial step into a chance for smart dispute resolution.

The preliminary hearing sets up everything that follows. It helps direct how your case moves forward and lets both sides show their strengths and weaknesses. Small employers gain huge benefits from knowing what to expect and how to handle case management talks and strike-out arguments. This stage can decide whether problems get solved early or go to a full trial, making it a key part of sorting out disputes.

This guide gives you a complete understanding of why preliminary hearings matter, what they cover, and how to use them strategically. You'll learn practical tips for filling out case management forms, collecting and showing important documents, and building arguments about strike-outs and deposit orders. With these insights, you can face your hearing with confidence, using strategies designed for small employers in 2025.

What Is a Preliminary Hearing? Understanding Its Purpose and Scope

A preliminary hearing happens before the main trial in UK Employment Tribunals. Its main job is to manage cases well, making sure legal and factual issues get sorted out properly. The hearing helps speed up the whole process by setting deadlines and clear rules for sharing documents, witness statements, and other evidence. An Employment Judge usually runs these hearings alone, but they don't decide the final outcome of your case. Instead, they build the foundation for a fair trial.

During your preliminary hearing, the judge learns about the issues that need solving later. This meeting helps tackle early questions like:

• Whether the tribunal has the right to hear your case
• If claims were filed on time
• Questions about eligibility under laws like the Equality Act 2010

For many disputes, answering these questions early can make a real difference to what happens later. The hearing also looks at requests to strike out parts of claims or to set deposit orders if arguments seem unlikely to succeed. Basically, it's a planning session aimed at avoiding delays and making sure the final hearing focuses only on what matters.

Key Objectives of a Preliminary Hearing

Preliminary hearings serve several important goals that help both the tribunal and everyone involved:

1. Clear up disputes by mapping out legal and factual matters
2. Give specific instructions or case management orders
3. Decide preliminary issues that might settle liability
4. Look at how parties have behaved during proceedings
5. Explore alternative dispute resolution methods

First, they clear up disputes by mapping out the legal and factual matters that need deciding later. This means both you and the claimant can understand exactly what you're arguing about, preventing confusion when the case moves on. The judge uses this time to give specific instructions or case management orders, like setting deadlines for sharing documents, witness statements, and detailed loss calculations. This step keeps cases moving forward smoothly.

Another main goal involves deciding preliminary issues that might settle liability before the final hearing. These could include questions about whether claims were filed within time limits or if claimants meet specific legal requirements. The hearing can also look at how parties have behaved during proceedings, including whether claims should be struck out for having no realistic chance of success or being brought to cause trouble. It might involve talking about deposit orders, where parties must pay money to continue certain arguments. Finally, preliminary hearings offer chances to explore other ways to solve disputes, like judicial mediation, which might prevent the need for a full hearing by encouraging early settlements.

Types of Preliminary Hearings

While "preliminary hearing" covers different types, Employment Tribunals mainly use two kinds. The first type, called a Case Management Preliminary Hearing (CMPH), focuses mainly on scheduling and running the case. These hearings often deal with complex disputes like discrimination or whistleblowing claims, where judges set detailed timetables for tasks like document exchanges and witness statements. CMPHs usually happen remotely by phone or video call and stay private. Their main goal is preparing cases for final hearings by making clear what claims and responses involve.

A Preliminary Issue Hearing deals with important legal or factual questions that might decide cases before full trials happen. This type is more formal and often takes place in public, as it involves deciding key issues like jurisdiction, time limits, or whether claimants qualify under specific laws, such as disability rules under the Equality Act 2010. Unlike CMPHs, these hearings may need evidence from witnesses or expert reports. Both types help reduce what gets covered in full hearings and make sure cases proceed in an orderly way, with only relevant issues moving forward for resolution.

Preparing for Your Preliminary Hearing

Good preparation makes a huge difference in how well your preliminary hearing goes. As a small employer, spending time getting ready can affect both how quickly things move and what happens in the end. Effective preparation means understanding what you need to do, gathering important documents, and possibly getting legal advice to support your arguments. A well-prepared case not only builds confidence with the tribunal but also helps you control how the hearing goes, avoiding unnecessary delays and costs.

Understanding the Notice of Hearing and Agenda

When your Notice of Preliminary Hearing arrives, read through everything carefully. The notice tells you the date, time, and how the hearing will happen—whether in person, by phone, or video call. Just as important is the case management agenda that comes with it. This agenda shows the framework both parties need to complete. It covers different parts, including names of everyone involved, specific claims and responses from both sides, what remedies are being asked for (like detailed loss calculations), and the main legal and factual issues needing resolution.

The agenda also sets out suggested timelines for submitting documents, witness statements, and managing evidence. Filling it out correctly and, when possible, agreeing with the other party before submitting helps a lot. You typically need to send in the completed agenda at least seven days before the hearing, giving everyone enough time to review details.

What exactly happens if you miss these deadlines or fill out forms incorrectly?

Getting this step wrong can seriously hurt your case. Missing deadlines might lead to parts of your defence being struck out, while incomplete or inaccurate forms signal to the tribunal that you're not taking proceedings seriously.

Gathering Key Information and Documentation

Before your hearing, make sure you can easily access all relevant documents and detailed information. Review employment contracts, disciplinary records, company policies, and correspondence that might support your defence. Make sure you also create a complete list of documents you have and specify any documents you expect the other side to produce. It's equally important to compile details about when key witnesses might testify and note any dates or times that could conflict with future hearing dates.

This preparation means when the tribunal asks for specific details or evidence, you can give quick and accurate responses. Having clear records of all necessary documents not only builds your confidence but also creates strong foundations for your arguments during the hearing. Think of it like preparing for an important business meeting—you wouldn't walk in without your key files and information ready.

Seeking Legal Advice

While representing yourself can work for small employers, talking with a legal professional who knows employment law is really recommended. An employment law specialist can review your case, pointing out strengths and weaknesses and making sure your submissions are complete and accurate. They help fill out case management agendas, draft clear lists of issues to decide, and give strategic guidance during hearings.

"Even the most well-prepared small employer can benefit from professional legal guidance at preliminary hearings. Understanding procedural nuances and legal precedents can make the difference between a successful defence and costly mistakes."
- Sarah Mitchell, Employment Law Specialist at Lewis Silkin LLP

Even if you end up appearing yourself, having expert legal advice increases your chances of effectively arguing against strike-out applications or deposit orders. Getting the right legal support not only improves your preparation but also helps you follow procedural rules, potentially saving time and reducing costs over time. Litigated members often find that understanding legal precedents through expert analysis gives them the confidence to handle preliminary hearings more effectively, even when representing themselves.

Case Management Discussions: Setting the Stage for Your Defence

Case management preliminary hearings guide how cases get conducted before reaching final hearings. During these discussions, Employment Judges work with both parties to narrow down issues, set detailed timetables, and establish case management orders. For small employers, taking part actively in these discussions matters a lot, as it gives you chances to present evidence clearly, outline arguments, and make sure disputes proceed in measured and efficient ways. Good case management discussions can make big differences in ensuring procedural matters don't derail your defence, keeping focus on important issues.

Clarifying Issues and Agreeing Directions

One main job of case management hearings is establishing clarity about what disputes involve. During hearings, judges engage both parties in creating clear "lists of issues" that need addressing. These lists form the backbone of your case, guiding upcoming evidence and legal arguments. Once issues get clarified, judges issue directions or case management orders. These orders set deadlines for important tasks like sharing documents, submitting witness statements, and preparing detailed loss schedules. They also outline formats for building hearing bundles with all relevant documents organized.

Being precise in agreeing these directions matters a lot. Not complying with or missing these deadlines could lead to bad consequences like claims being struck out. By focusing on details during this stage and making sure all parties understand agreed timetables, you help secure smooth pathways towards final hearings and protect your defence. The tribunal expects professional behaviour here, even if you're not a lawyer.

"Effective case management is the foundation of successful employment tribunal defence. Small employers who engage proactively with case management orders and deadlines significantly improve their chances of favourable outcomes."
- Emma Chapman, Partner at Addleshaw Goddard LLP

The Role of Technology and Remote Hearings

With better digital communication, many preliminary hearings now happen remotely. Whether by phone or video conference, these formats offer flexibility and cost savings, particularly for small employers who may not have resources for physical appearances. To benefit from remote hearings, make sure you have stable and secure internet connections along with clear audio and video equipment.

Get familiar with the specific platform chosen for the hearing and test all technical parts well in advance. Join hearings from quiet, private spaces free from disruptions, where documents, notes, and case management agendas are easily accessible. As you take part in discussions, speak clearly and wait politely for your turn, making sure your points get communicated effectively. Even though remote settings might seem less formal, maintaining professional behaviour is vital for convincing tribunals of your preparedness and ability to present your defence.

Proactive Steps for Small Employers

Taking proactive measures can significantly affect how case management discussions go. Start preparing early—don't delay in completing case management agendas. Internal reviews of employment records, relevant correspondence, and policy documents are essential. Identify potential witnesses within your organisation who can support your account and make sure they're ready to provide clear, factual testimony if needed.

Think ahead about the claimant's potential arguments by analysing cases critically and identifying any weak points. Consider possibilities of using alternative dispute resolution methods, such as judicial mediation, which may offer faster and less costly resolution than full hearings. By addressing these elements head-on, you set clear expectations for tribunals regarding issues in dispute and show well-organised, compliant approaches. This proactive stance not only strengthens your position but can also influence tribunals to issue directions that are fair and balanced for your business. Litigated analysis shows that employers who engage proactively in case management often achieve better outcomes than those who take reactive approaches.

Arguing for and Against Strike-Outs in 2025

The power to strike out parts or entire claims or responses is among the most important decisions made during preliminary hearings. In many ways, strike-outs are considered severe measures—often described as harsh—and get applied sparingly. In 2025, the expected approach to strike-outs continues focusing on making sure only claims with reasonable prospects of success are allowed to proceed. This section explains grounds for strike-outs, how you might argue for them if you believe claimant cases are weak, and how to defend against them if faced with strike-out applications against your responses.

Grounds for a Strike-Out

Under Rule 37(1) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, tribunals can strike out claims or responses on several grounds:

• No reasonable prospect of success
• Scandalous, vexatious, or non-compliant conduct
• Claims not being actively pursued
• Compromised procedural fairness

First, if there's no reasonable prospect of success, tribunals may consider claims legally unsound or factually unsubstantiated. Evidence that directly contradicts claimant allegations can support this argument. Additionally, if party conduct during proceedings has been scandalous, vexatious, or marked by not following tribunal orders and rules, such behaviour may show claims being pursued in bad faith.

Tribunals also consider whether claims have been actively pursued. In some cases, if procedural fairness gets compromised or if contexts prevent fair hearings, tribunals may decide continuing with claims is untenable. Importantly, before any strike-out orders get finalised, affected parties must get fair opportunities to respond and present arguments. This safeguard makes sure strike-outs remain remedial rather than punitive, used only when evidence shows clear absence of merit.

How often do tribunals actually strike out cases completely?

Complete strike-outs happen relatively rarely because tribunals prefer giving parties chances to present their cases fully. Most strike-outs involve specific parts of claims rather than entire cases.

Arguing for a Strike-Out as an Employer

As a small employer, you might find it helpful to apply for strike-outs if you have clear evidence that claimant cases lack both legal and factual foundations. Begin by showing claims present no reasonable prospect of success, whether due to failing to meet statutory criteria or contradictions in evidence. For example, if claimants haven't met qualifying periods for unfair dismissal or if established documentation directly contradicts their allegations, these points should be clearly stated.

Further, detailed records of any non-compliance—including ignored tribunal orders or abusive communications—can serve as strong support for your case. When arguing for strike-outs, focus on presenting undisputed and documented evidence that makes claimant arguments appear not just unlikely but entirely unworkable. By clearly highlighting these weaknesses, you not only support calls for strike-outs but also signal to tribunals that pursuing full hearings would be inefficient and unjustified. Litigated case analysis demonstrates that successful strike-out applications typically combine clear legal arguments with comprehensive documentary evidence.

Defending Against a Strike-Out as an Employer

If you face strike-out applications, defending your response robustly is vital. Begin by addressing each ground cited by opposing parties, showing that your claim or defence does indeed have reasonable prospects of success. Emphasise that genuine factual disputes exist which require full hearings to resolve rather than summary dismissals. If non-compliance issues are raised, provide detailed and honest explanations, showing any deviations weren't deliberate or intended to obstruct processes.

"When defending against strike-out applications, employers must demonstrate genuine factual disputes that require full hearings to resolve. The key is showing the tribunal that summary dismissal would prevent a fair assessment of the case on its merits."
- Michael Reed QC, Cornerstone Barristers

It's also important to argue that strike-outs would undermine principles of procedural fairness, effectively preventing full assessments of cases on their merits. By offering comprehensive evidence and clear counter-arguments, you can persuade tribunals that dismissing your responses would be both unjust and contrary to fair legal proceedings. Remember that tribunals generally want to hear cases on their merits unless there are compelling reasons not to.

Impact of Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) Decisions

Recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decisions highlight trends of greater judicial scrutiny before strike-outs can be finalised. In several cases, tribunals have faced reversals of strike-out orders where procedural errors were evident or where there was failure to consider important factors such as requests for reasonable adjustments. For small employers, these decisions emphasise importance of procedural fairness and need to ensure all arguments get presented fully.

Such precedents serve as reminders that tribunals are increasingly careful with power to strike out, making it essential to build cases on well-documented evidence and sound legal reasoning. LexRex tracks these EAT developments closely, helping members understand how appeal decisions affect preliminary hearing strategies and when strike-out challenges might succeed.

Deposit Orders: A Financial Implication for Weak Arguments

Alongside striking out claims, Employment Tribunals have authority to impose deposit orders during preliminary hearings. Deposit orders are meant to prevent parties from advancing arguments that have little realistic prospect of success by requiring financial commitments. For small employers, understanding how these orders work and knowing when to argue for or against them is important for defending your case.

What Is a Deposit Order?

Under Rule 39 of Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, deposit orders require parties to pay sums—up to £1,000 per allegation or argument—as conditions for continuing to advance particular points. The thinking behind this measure is to filter out claims that are clearly weak while making sure only arguments with realistic chances of success proceed to full hearings. When deposit orders get imposed, judges must clearly explain reasons behind decisions and warn that failing to meet financial requirements will result in allegations being struck out.

Moreover, tribunals take into account paying parties' abilities to meet orders, making sure deposits get set at levels that are justifiable and proportionate to potential risks within proceedings. This financial test acts as both a deterrent to weak arguments and a signal about the tribunal's early assessment of case strength.

Impact and Consequences for Small Employers

For small employers, deposit orders can have significant implications. If tribunals issue deposit orders against your defence, it signals views that subsets of your arguments are regarded as weak. Consequently, you'll need to pay specified sums to continue defending those arguments. Failing to make payments can result in particular points being struck out, thereby narrowing scopes of your defence.

Additionally, should you lose on contested issues, you may be more vulnerable to subsequent costs orders. Imposing deposit orders serves not only as precautionary measures but also as strategic signals regarding tribunals' early assessments of case merits. This financial requirement encourages more robust and well-substantiated defences from the start. Think of it as the tribunal asking you to put your money where your mouth is—literally.

Arguing for or Against a Deposit Order

When dealing with deposit orders, approaches depend on whether you're seeking orders or defending against them. If arguing for deposit orders, identify and isolate specific allegations in claimant cases that are clearly unsupported by evidence or legal precedent. Present these weaknesses in clear, documented terms, making cases that advancing such points would be futile.

Conversely, if defending against deposit orders, provide compelling evidence that contested arguments do indeed have reasonable prospects of success. Offer detailed counter-evidence and stress the fairness of allowing arguments to be heard, especially if requested deposit amounts are disproportionate given your current financial circumstances. This debate revolves around establishing whether tribunals' early financial tests are justified or whether they unfairly restrict potentially viable defences. Litigated members benefit from understanding how tribunals assess "little reasonable prospect of success" through detailed case analysis and precedent studies.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Options at Preliminary Hearings

Preliminary hearings aren't only for setting directions or ruling on case fundamentals; they also present opportunities for parties to explore alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. ADR has emerged as valuable option to resolve disputes without proceeding to full hearings, thereby saving time, financial resources, and reducing stress on both sides. In 2025, ADR options during preliminary hearings include judicial mediation, judicial assessment, and widely used ACAS Early Conciliation.

Judicial Mediation

Judicial mediation is confidential and voluntary alternative that aims to bring parties together through facilitated discussions led by neutral Employment Judges. In this process, judges act as mediators rather than decision-makers, encouraging both parties to negotiate mutually acceptable settlements. Mediation sessions typically get conducted remotely via phone or video conference, though some hearings may still be held in person for more complex disputes.

During mediation, judges help clarify misunderstandings, assist in identifying common ground, and encourage compromise on key issues. One notable benefit of judicial mediation is its impressive success rate. Research shows over 65% of cases settle on mediation days, with several more reaching settlements shortly thereafter. For small employers, this method offers cost-effective and efficient ways to resolve disputes while avoiding lengthy and often stressful processes of final hearings. By engaging in judicial mediation, you retain greater control over outcomes, secure flexible remedies, and benefit from processes focused on practical resolution rather than rigid adjudication.

What happens if mediation fails?

If mediation doesn't result in settlement, the case simply proceeds to the next stage of tribunal proceedings. Nothing said during mediation can be used against you later, and different judges will handle your final hearing.

Judicial Assessment

Judicial assessment is another ADR tool available at preliminary hearings. In this process, Employment Judges provide impartial evaluations of strengths and weaknesses of each party's case based solely on paperwork and submissions already filed. Unlike mediation, judicial assessment doesn't involve negotiation between parties. Instead, it offers confidential, non-binding opinions regarding likely outcomes of disputes.

This assessment helps each party understand the potential risks and benefits of pursuing claims to full hearings. For small employers, receiving judicial assessments can be invaluable as it informs decisions on whether to continue defending specific arguments or consider settlements. Insights gained through judicial assessment often prompt more realistic negotiations, making it a useful mechanism for recalibrating legal strategies amidst evolving proceedings. Litigated analysis shows that parties who engage with judicial assessment often reach more informed decisions about case progression.

ACAS Early Conciliation

ACAS Early Conciliation is a process distinct from preliminary hearings but forms a mandatory prerequisite before lodging Employment Tribunal claims. Under this scheme, claimants must first contact ACAS, which then offers free and confidential conciliation services aimed at resolving disputes without formal tribunal proceedings. The conciliation process identifies areas of agreement and facilitates mutually acceptable settlements, thus reducing the need for full tribunal hearings.

For small employers, engaging with ACAS early can often prevent cases from escalating to preliminary hearings, saving considerable time and costs. This structured process helps both sides address issues in informal settings, encouraging open dialogue and practical solutions without formality of courtroom environments. Many employment disputes get resolved at this stage, making it worthwhile to engage constructively with ACAS conciliation even when you believe claims lack merit.

Practical Guidelines and Checklists for Small Employers

Effective preparation is the cornerstone of successful preliminary hearings. Clear sets of practical guidelines and detailed checklists can help ensure all procedural steps are met and cases are presented comprehensively.

Before the Hearing

Begin preparations as soon as you receive Notices of Preliminary Hearings:

1. Closely read notices to understand dates, times, modes (whether remote or in-person), and specific purposes of hearings
2. Complete case management agendas with meticulous care
3. Organise all relevant documents such as contracts, policies, and internal correspondence
4. Compile lists of key witnesses along with their availability
5. Consider consulting with legal advisers to review submissions

These documents should include confirmation of parties, detailed claims and responses, clear outlines of remedies requested, identification of key legal issues, and proposals for scheduling tasks such as document exchanges and witness submissions. Starting early helps build solid foundations that reduce surprises at hearings and increase confidence.

During the Hearing

Entering hearings, punctuality and preparedness matter greatly:

• Log in or arrive at hearing locations ahead of time to verify all technical setups work correctly
• Keep all relevant documents and notes within easy reach
• Listen actively to both judges' questions and opposing parties' points
• Speak clearly and concisely when describing arguments
• Respect procedural decorum expected in tribunals
• Take detailed notes during hearings

Throughout sessions, make sure each point gets well supported by evidence or documentation. Remember that judges appreciate parties who come prepared and can present their cases clearly and professionally.

After the Hearing

Once hearings conclude, follow these steps:

1. Review written orders and any directions issued by tribunals carefully
2. Note all deadlines and specific actions required
3. Immediately begin processes of complying with these directions
4. Reassess overall strategies based on hearing outcomes
5. Maintain clear communication with legal representatives
6. Keep detailed records of all orders

This might involve revisiting evidence, consulting further with legal advisers, or even considering settlement options if tribunal feedback indicates weaknesses in positions. Litigated members often find that post-hearing analysis helps them better understand tribunal expectations and improves their approach to subsequent proceedings.

The Litigated Advantage for Small Employers in Preliminary Hearings

Navigating the complexities of preliminary hearings can be an overwhelming task for small employers. Litigated stands out as a trusted knowledge hub that provides targeted support and expert guidance tailored to the unique challenges you face. By offering in-depth analyses of Employment Appeal Tribunal decisions and legal precedents, Litigated makes complex case management discussions clearer, helping you understand when and how to argue for or against strike-outs effectively.

Making Complex Legal Precedents Accessible and Strategic Insights

Litigated makes complex legal decisions accessible by translating dense legal language into clear, actionable insights. We provide detailed reviews of cases where strike-out orders were reversed due to procedural errors or failure to consider essential factors like reasonable adjustments for disability. Our analysis explains legal tests applied by tribunals and how they interpret evidence, giving you practical frameworks to assess your own cases.

This approach not only helps you identify weak points in claimant cases but also informs your arguments when defending against strike-outs. By bridging gaps between academic legal theory and practical litigation strategy, Litigated equips you with the tools needed to effectively present defences. You learn to identify issues, compile persuasive evidence, and prepare documents in line with tribunal expectations, all of which empower you to take control of proceedings. Our case studies show real examples of how preliminary hearing strategies succeed or fail, giving you practical templates to follow.

Proactive Information and Community Support

Staying ahead in employment law is challenging, especially with constantly evolving regulations and legal precedents. Litigated offers proactive updates via monthly newsletters and regular blog posts that highlight upcoming legislative changes, such as adjustments to TUPE regulations and amendments to tribunal procedures. Our thriving community of legal professionals, HR managers, and small business owners provides platforms for sharing experiences and practical tips.

This network not only helps you stay informed but also offers peer support and expert recommendations on navigating preliminary hearings. With real-world insights and supportive communities, you can approach hearings more confidently and with a deeper understanding of both theoretical and practical aspects of dispute resolution. Litigated provides unique advantages of combining expert analysis with community-driven knowledge, making sure you have access to the most current and relevant information as you prepare for 2025. Our members frequently share their preliminary hearing experiences, creating valuable databases of practical knowledge that benefits everyone in the community.

Conclusion

Preliminary hearings are vital components of Employment Tribunal processes, serving as stages for case management, issue clarification, and early dispute resolution. For small employers, understanding the details—from types of hearings to arguments for and against strike-outs and deposit orders—can significantly influence case outcomes. By proactively preparing, diligently completing documentation, and using available legal advice, you can present robust and well-organised defences.

Staying informed about recent legal precedents and regulatory changes will help you stay ahead. Good preparation and strategic engagement at preliminary hearings can safeguard your business interests and pave way for more favourable outcomes. Remember that preliminary hearings, while formal legal proceedings, are also opportunities to demonstrate your professionalism and commitment to fair process resolution.

FAQs

What Is the Difference Between a Case Management Preliminary Hearing and a Preliminary Issue Hearing?

A Case Management Preliminary Hearing (CMPH) focuses on procedural and administrative matters. It sets timetables for document exchange, witness statements, and other case management orders without determining substantive issues. Conversely, a Preliminary Issue Hearing is designed to resolve key legal or factual questions—such as jurisdiction, time limits, or eligibility under specific statutes—that might dispose of claims entirely or significantly narrow issues before full trials. The formal nature of Preliminary Issue Hearings means they involve more detailed examinations of evidence and are often held in public forums.

Can a Preliminary Hearing Lead to My Case Being Dismissed Entirely?

Yes, preliminary hearings can result in parts or even the entirety of claims being struck out if tribunals find there are no reasonable prospects of success or that procedural standards haven't been met. This measure, however, is considered severe and only gets applied after providing affected parties ample opportunities to respond. Tribunals carefully evaluate whether dismissing cases entirely is just and follows procedural fairness before taking such steps. Complete dismissals are relatively rare, as tribunals prefer allowing parties to present their cases on merit where possible.

What Is a Deposit Order and How Might It Affect a Small Employer?

A deposit order gets issued when tribunals determine particular arguments or allegations have little realistic chance of success. This measure requires parties advancing those claims to pay specified deposits—up to £1,000 per allegation—to continue arguments. For small employers, such orders not only impose financial burdens but also serve as strategic signals from tribunals about argument weakness. Failing to pay can result in specific allegations being struck out, while subsequent losses on issues may increase the risks of costs orders. The good news is that tribunals consider your ability to pay when setting deposit amounts, so they shouldn't be set at levels that would make compliance impossible.

SIGN UP

For FREE access to Litigated's Member Articles

Subscribe

Email sent! Check your inbox to complete your signup.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nick

With a background in international business and a passion for technology, Nick aims to blend his diverse expertise to advocate for justice in employment and technology law.