Case 1308904/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Roberts v Element Materials Technology Aerospace UK Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1308904/2023
- Decision date
- 6 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Edmonds
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mrs Fox, Dr Hammersley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Roberts
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, including constructive unfair dismissal and ordinary unfair dismissal, and automatic unfair dismissal were not well-founded and were dismissed.
The Tribunal also dismissed the complaints of detriment for making a protected disclosure, unauthorised deductions from wages, failure to pay holiday pay, and failure to allow the claimant to be accompanied under section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999. The judgment states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would only be provided if requested, so no further findings are set out in the written record.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the complaint of failure to allow the claimant to be accompanied under section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of unfair dismissal, including both constructive unfair dismissal and ordinary unfair dismissal, was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment states that the complaint of being subjected to detriment for making a protected disclosure was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the complaint of failure to pay holiday pay was not well-founded and dismissed. | 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.
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.