Case 2500792/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Welsh v Tyne Theatre and Opera House Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500792/2023
- Decision date
- 9 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Welsh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 16 January 2024, the claimant was ordered to pay a deposit of £330. The order was sent to the claimant on 9 April 2024, but no part of the deposit was paid.
Because the deposit was not paid, the complaints in respect of which the order had been made were struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment states that these were all complaints set out at Annex B to the case management orders made on 16 January 2024 and sent to the parties on 9 April 2024, save for complaints 9 and 10.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not identify the underlying complaint types. It states that the claimant did not pay the £330 deposit ordered after the preliminary hearing on 16 January 2024, and that the complaints covered by that order were struck out under rule 39(4) of the ET Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment says all complaints set out at Annex B to the case management orders were struck out save for complaints 9 and 10. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 39(4) of the ET Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.