Case 1305695/2022 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Mr J Tidy, Solicitor — 2023
- Case reference
- 1305695/2022
- Decision date
- 26 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dean Appearance
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Dean in Birmingham by CVP on 25 April 2023. The claimant, Mr A Hussain, applied to amend his complaints in claim number 1305695/2022 so as to include a complaint of detriment in contravention of section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal refused the amendment application. The written record states only that the application did not succeed; no substantive findings on the merits of any underlying whistleblowing detriment complaint are set out in the written judgment.
The record also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary remedy was awarded or addressed in the written record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The claimant's application to amend his complaints to include a complaint of detriment in contravention of section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 did not succeed and was refused at a preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.