Case 2405776/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Bell v General Dental Council — 2024
- Case reference
- 2405776/2023
- Decision date
- 5 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Bell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out two disability complaints: discrimination arising from disability and breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. Both allegations had been identified at the preliminary stage and, following the hearing on 23 April 2024, the claimant was ordered to pay a deposit of £500 for each complaint. The deposit order was sent on 13 May 2024.
The claimant did not pay either deposit. On that basis, Employment Judge Phil Allen struck out both complaints under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records only the strike-out of those two allegations and does not make any substantive findings on their merits.
The judgment states that the remaining claims were listed to be heard at the final hearing fixed for 3 to 5 September 2024.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of discrimination arising from disability listed at 7.2.4/3.2.2 in the lists of issues. The claimant was ordered to pay a £500 deposit for this allegation after the preliminary hearing on 23 April 2024, but did not pay it. The complaint was therefore struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments listed at 8.2.1 and 8.5.1 / 4.2.1 and 4.5.1. The claimant was ordered to pay a £500 deposit for this allegation after the preliminary hearing on 23 April 2024, but did not pay it. The complaint was therefore struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.