Mr A Raide v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd: 6002076/2025
JUDGMENT
[1]All of the claimant’s complaints are dismissed on the basis of res judicata / issue estoppel, alternatively on the basis that they are an abuse of process in accordance with the so-called rule in Henderson v Henderson, apart from:1.1 the complaints of race discrimination, which complaints are also dismissed, but purely on the basis that they are an abuse of process in accordance with the so-called rule in Henderson v Henderson;1.2 the complaints of ‘whistleblowing’ detriment set out in paragraphs 5.14.2, 5.14.3 and 5.14.4 of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025, which complaints are made subject to deposit orders, below.[2]It is part of the above decision that the following complaints / proposed complaints are not part of the claimant’s claim, that no application for permission to amend the claimant’s claim to add them has been made, and that any such application would be refused:2.1 the complaint of victimisation set out in paragraph 5.12.2 of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025. If this complaint were part of the claimant’s claim it would be dismissed as an abuse of process in accordance with the so-called rule in Henderson v Henderson;2.2 any whistleblowing complaint based on an alleged protected disclosure made on or around 29 October 2024; 1 of 62.3 a whistleblowing detriment complaint relying as the detriment on the respondent allegedly instructing the claimant “to cease contact with individuals who had been providing support during this ordeal” that relies, as the alleged instruction, on something other than the respondent’s email to him of 7 January 2025 that is at page 348 of the file/bundle of documents used at this hearing.[3]If the claimant does not pay the deposit ordered below in relation to the complaint set out in paragraph 5.14.4 of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025 and that complaint is duly struck out in accordance with Rule 40(4) of the ET Procedure Rules 2024 (“ETPR”), but the claimant does pay either or both of the deposits ordered in relation to the complaints set out in paragraphs 5.14.2 and 5.14.3 [of the same document], the complaints in paragraphs 5.14.2 and/or 5.14.3 (as applicable) will be automatically struck out without further order pursuant to ETPR Rule 38 on the grounds that in those circumstances they would have no reasonable prospects of success. DEPOSIT ORDER[4]The Tribunal considers that the following complaints have little reasonable prospects of success for the following reasons and that it is appropriate to make deposit orders in relation to each of them:4.1 the complaints of ‘whistleblowing’ detriment set out in paragraphs 5.14.2, 5.14.3 and 5.14.4 of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025;4.2 they are complaints that rely as the alleged protected disclosures on the following: disclosures about data protection / data privacy issues, relating both to the claimant’s and to a colleague’s – Lauren Hodson’s – data. The first alleged protected disclosure was in early February 2024, after he resigned, when he emailed the respondent’s process compliance department. He allegedly made further protected disclosures to compliance about the same issues between April and June 2024; and to HR around 15 to 17 June 2024 and again around 14 August 2024;4.3 the complaint in paragraph 5.14.4 is about what is described in page 3 of the Main Claim document (the document attached to the claim form headed “Main Claim”), as “Harassment Through Isolation”, consisting of, around Christmas 2024, HR allegedly instructing the claimant “to cease contact with individuals who had been providing support during this ordeal”, those individuals being JLR staff, and that instruction being contained in the respondent’s email to him of 7 January 2025 that is at page 348 of the file/bundle of documents used at this hearing;4.4 that complaint in paragraph 5.14.4 has little reasonable prospects of success because, given in particular the contents and timing of that email of 7 January 2025, it is most unlikely that that email was sent on the ground that the claimant made any of the alleged protected disclosures relied on; 2 of 64.5 the complaints in paragraphs 5.14.2 and 5.14.3 [of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025], which relate to detriments to which the Claimant was allegedly subjected between 17 June and 14 August 2024, will have no reasonable prospects of success if the complaint in paragraph 5.14.4 fails because of time limits and it follows that if the complaint in paragraph 5.14.4 has little reasonable prospects of success, the complaints in paragraphs 5.14.2 and 5.14.3 have little reasonable prospects of success too.[5]The claimant is ORDERED to pay a deposit of £50 each in relation to the three complaints set out in paragraphs 5.14.2, 5.14.3 and 5.14.4 of the written record of the preliminary hearing of 13 November 2025 not later than 24 February 2026 as a condition of being permitted to continue to advance that complaint. This means that if the claimant wants to continue with all three of them he must pay a total of £150.[6]The Judge has discussed with the claimant his ability to pay the deposits and has had regard to the information provided by the claimant when deciding the amount of the deposits. In particular, the claimant confirmed that he could, without undue hardship, afford to pay slightly more than £150 within 28 days.[7]The claimant must by 25 February 2026 email the Tribunal and the respondent and:7.1 confirm whether or not he has paid the deposit(s);7.2 if he has paid some but not all of the deposits, which of them he has paid and which he has not paid.[8]UNLESS ORDER (ETPR Rule 39): If the claimant pays some but not all of the deposits and does not comply with the order in paragraph 7.2 above, his entire claim must be dismissed without further order.[9]If the claim is not struck out for non-payment of the deposits or dismissed for noncompliance with the order in paragraph 8 above, the claimant and the respondent must by 12 February 2026 provide the Tribunal with their proposals, agreed if possible, for the case management orders the Tribunal should make to take what remains of the claim forward. Employment Judge Camp Approved on 25 January 2026 3 of 6 NOTES 1. Full reasons for the judgment and for the deposit order were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless asked for by a written request presented by any party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. 2. Whenever they write to the Tribunal, the claimant and the respondent must copy their correspondence to each other. 3. Most Tribunal hearings are now recorded. If a hearing has been recorded you may request a transcript of the recording, for which a charge may be payable. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings, and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here: https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and- legislation-practice-directions/ 4. All judgments apart from those under rule 51 and any written reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at https://www.gov.uk/employment- tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimants and respondents. 5. You can appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal if you think a legal mistake was made in an Employment Tribunal decision. There is more information here: https://www.gov.uk/appeal-employment-appeal-tribunal 4 of 6 NOTE ACCOMPANYING DEPOSIT ORDER[1]The Tribunal has made an order (a “deposit order”) requiring a party to pay a deposit as a condition of being permitted to continue to advance the allegations or arguments specified in the order.[2]If that party pays the deposit and continues to advance the allegations or arguments specified in the order, but the Tribunal decides those allegations or arguments against that party for substantially the reasons given in the order, that party would then lose their deposit. In addition, the Tribunal might make an award of costs or preparation time against that party for unreasonably pursuing those allegations or arguments. What happens if you do not pay the deposit?[3]If the deposit is not paid the complaint or response to which the order relates will be struck out on the date specified in the order. When to pay the deposit?[4]The party against whom the deposit order has been made must pay the deposit by the date specified in the order.[5]If the deposit is not paid within that time, the complaint or response to which the order relates will be struck out. What happens to the deposit?[6]If the Tribunal later decides the specific allegation or argument against the party which paid the deposit for substantially the reasons given in the deposit order, that party shall be treated as having acted unreasonably, unless the contrary is shown, and the deposit shall be paid to the other party (or, if there is more than one, to such party or parties as the Tribunal orders). If a costs or preparation time order is made against the party which paid the deposit, the deposit will go towards the payment of that order. Otherwise, the deposit will be refunded. How to pay the deposit?[7]Payment of the deposit must be made by cheque or postal order only, made payable to HMCTS. Payments CANNOT be made in cash.[8]Payment should be accompanied by the tear-off slip below or should identify the Case Number and the name of the party paying the deposit.[9]Payment must be made to the address on the tear-off slip below.[10]An acknowledgment of payment will not be issued, unless requested. 5 of 6 Enquiries[11]Enquiries relating to the case should be made to the Tribunal office dealing with the case.[12]Enquiries relating to the deposit should be referred to the address on the tear-off slip below or by telephone on 0117 976 3033. The PHR Administration Team will only discuss the deposit with the party that has been ordered to pay the deposit. If you are not the party that has been ordered to pay the deposit you will need to contact the Tribunal office dealing with the case.[13]You have the right to appeal against the decision to make a deposit order if you consider that the decision, or the amount ordered, is wrong in law. The time for appealing is 42 days from the date on which the deposit order was sent out in writing by the Tribunal. Details of how to appeal can be found here: HMCTS Booklet T440: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-to-appeal-to-the-employmentappeal-tribunal-t440 The website of the Employment Appeal Tribunal: https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appealtribunal/ DEPOSIT ORDER To: Judicial Fees, Expenses and Payroll (JFEPs) Team Magistrates’ Court & Tribunal Hearing Centre Marlborough Street Bristol BS1 3NU Case Number 6002076/2025 Name of party Mr A Raide I enclose a cheque/postal order (delete as appropriate) for £__________ 6 of 6