Case 1301500/2017 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2017
- Case reference
- 1301500/2017
- Decision date
- 23 August 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hughes
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in Birmingham before Employment Judge Hughes on 23 August 2017. The claimant, Mrs K Biddle, appeared in person and the respondents were represented by Ms G Leadbetter, Counsel.
The tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed on withdrawal. It also recorded that the constructive unfair dismissal claims against the second, third, fourth and fifth respondents were dismissed because the Employment Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them.
No monetary award was made and the judgment does not record any remedy findings. The decision is limited to the procedural disposal of the claims rather than any determination of liability on the merits.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal claims against the second to fifth respondents were dismissed because the Employment Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.