Case 6002570/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Peter Murdoch v Electronic Arts (UK) Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002570/2024
- Decision date
- 16 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Comfort Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Peter Murdoch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Comfort dated 16 June 2025 struck out the claims for whistleblowing and victimisation detriment and the unfair dismissal claim under Rule 40(4) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The reason given was that the claimant had not paid the deposit ordered by the tribunal on 10 February 2025.
The judgment records that the remaining complaints were to be dealt with in separate Case Management Orders. No monetary award was made in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Struck out under Rule 40(4) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claimant did not pay the deposit ordered on 10 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment refers to this as "victimisation detriment"; it was struck out under Rule 40(4) because the claimant did not pay the deposit ordered on 10 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 40(4) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claimant did not pay the deposit ordered on 10 February 2025. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 40(4) Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.