Case 1304676/2021 · Employment Tribunal
MRS JANET BENNETT v Orton Manor Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1304676/2021
- Decision date
- 30 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ali Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
MRS JANET BENNETT
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Janet Bennett’s claims against Orton Manor Limited were heard at Midlands West ET by CVP on 29-30 March 2023 before Employment Judge Ali. The tribunal dismissed the ordinary unfair dismissal claim and also dismissed the automatic unfair dismissal claim based on the making of a protected disclosure.
The judgment records that the wrongful dismissal claim was no longer pursued after the Claimant accepted that she had been paid her correct notice pay of 5 weeks. That claim was therefore dismissed on withdrawal. The Claimant also confirmed that she had not made any application to amend the claim to add a holiday pay claim.
No monetary award was made. The judgment does not record any separate remedy calculation, and no holiday pay or other additional claim was adjudicated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as automatic unfair dismissal on grounds that a protected disclosure was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The Claimant accepted she had been paid her correct notice pay of 5 weeks, so the wrongful dismissal claim was no longer pursued and was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.