Case 2500948/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Hall v Durham County Council — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500948/2021
- Decision date
- 29 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Newburn Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Hall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing before Employment Judge Newburn at Newcastle CFCTC on 24 May 2022 was confined to the respondent's applications to strike out the claimant's claims on three grounds: no reasonable prospect of success, scandalous/unreasonable/vexatious conduct, and the contention that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. The tribunal rejected all three applications.
The written record is a short judgment and does not decide the merits of the underlying breach of contract, whistleblowing and unfair dismissal claims. No remedy was awarded in this decision, and the record notes that written reasons would only be provided if requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The respondent's applications to strike out the claim were refused. The judgment did not determine the merits of this claim. | Other | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The respondent's applications to strike out the claim were refused. The judgment did not determine the merits of this claim. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The respondent's applications to strike out the claim were refused. The judgment did not determine the merits of this claim. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.