Case 1600725/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Walters v Aneurin Bevan University Local Health Board HELD AT/BY: Wrexham by CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600725/2024
- Decision date
- 30 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Walters
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a case management hearing following a substantive preliminary hearing on the respondent's strike out application. The order records that a separate judgment dismissing the public interest disclosure detriment claims and deposit orders for sex discrimination claims would be issued.
The tribunal set directions for preparation for an eight-day liability hearing listed in May 2025. It recorded that it was not possible to define the remaining claims and issues until the claimant had decided whether to pay the deposits required to pursue the unlawful discrimination claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The case management order states that a separate judgment dismissing the public interest disclosure detriment claims will be issued; the reasons for dismissal are not included in this text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The order states that deposit orders will be issued in respect of claims of sex discrimination and that the extant claims and issues could not yet be defined pending the claimant's decision whether to pay deposits. | Other | Sex | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.