Case 2304523/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Steven Haynes v Musicians’ Union — 2021
- Case reference
- 2304523/2018
- Decision date
- 28 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clarke
- Venue
- London South Tribunal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Steven Haynes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 8 November 2021, Employment Judge Clarke sitting alone heard the claimant's request for reconsideration of the strike out that had followed non-compliance with the unless order at paragraph 1 of the order dated 1 October 2020. The request was refused.
The tribunal ordered that the claimant's claims against the Musicians' Union remain struck out. The written judgment records that the reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested in writing within 14 days of the judgment being sent to the parties. No merits findings or monetary remedy were made in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal refused reconsideration of the strike out; this claim remained struck out. The judgment does not contain separate merits findings on the underlying claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal refused reconsideration of the strike out; this claim remained struck out. The judgment does not contain separate merits findings on the underlying claim. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal refused reconsideration of the strike out; this claim remained struck out. The judgment does not contain separate merits findings on the underlying claim. | Struck out | — | — |
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.