Case 1401622/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Martin Apperley v Mitchells & Butler Retail Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401622/2024
- Decision date
- 16 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Richardson Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Martin Apperley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Southampton from 14 to 16 October 2025 before Employment Judge K Richardson. The claimant was represented by counsel and the respondent by a solicitor.
The judgment records that the complaints of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were not well-founded and were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out findings of fact, legal analysis, or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of unfair dismissal is not well-founded and is dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of wrongful dismissal is not well-founded and is dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.