Case 1304592/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr James Washbrook v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2026
- Case reference
- 1304592/2021
- Decision date
- 30 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mensah Date
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr James Washbrook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered the respondent's application for an extension of time to file and serve a response under Rule 20(1) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. It heard oral evidence from Ms Garner, Head of Business and Assurance at HMP Birmingham, and considered the representatives' submissions.
The Tribunal granted the application and extended time for the response to 4pm on 28 July 2022. It also corrected the respondent's name to "The Secretary of State for Justice".
The judgment recorded that the claimant's unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims would proceed to a substantive hearing on liability and remedy if appropriate. No liability findings or remedy awards were made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment did not determine liability or remedy for the unfair dismissal claim. It recorded that the claim would proceed to a substantive hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment did not determine liability or remedy for the wrongful dismissal claim. It recorded that the claim would proceed to a substantive hearing. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 20(1) of the Employment Tribunal 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.