Case 6002164/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Stuart Cunnington v Tyne Coast College — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002164/2025
- Decision date
- 17 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Stuart Cunnington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningStuart Cunnington brought a claim against Tyne Coast College for unlawful deduction of wages. The case was heard remotely at Newcastle Employment Tribunal on 17 April 2025 before Employment Judge Sweeney, with Mr Cunnington appearing in person and the respondent represented by solicitor James English.
The tribunal held that the claim of unlawful deduction of wages was not well-founded and dismissed it. The written record does not set out detailed factual findings or a separate remedies decision.
The judgment note records that reasons were given orally at the hearing. It also states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by a party within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal stated that the claim of unlawful deduction of wages was not well-founded and dismissed it. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.