Case 2406904/2022 · Employment Tribunal

A Donaldson v The Information Commissioner’s Office — 2024

Case reference: 2406904/2022
Decision date: 15 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Batten Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

A Donaldson

Respondent

The Information Commissioner’s Office

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing on 8 May 2024, Employment Judge Batten ordered the claimant to pay a deposit of £300.00 for each of two allegations of disability discrimination, with payment due by 4pm on 19 June 2024. The deposit order was sent to the claimant on 28 May 2024.

The tribunal recorded that no deposit was paid by the deadline, or at all, and that no monies had been received. It also recorded that the claimant had confirmed in writing that he no longer wished to pursue the disability discrimination allegations.

On that basis, the tribunal struck out the complaint of disability discrimination under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment states that the complaint of age discrimination was not affected by this decision and would proceed to a hearing.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The claimant was ordered at a preliminary hearing on 8 May 2024 to pay a deposit of £300.00 for each of 2 allegations of disability discrimination, payable by 4pm on 19 June 2024. No deposit was received, and the claimant confirmed in writing that he no longer wished to pursue the allegations.	Struck out	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.