Case 1401805/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Heard of Counsel For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1401805/2020
- Decision date
- 3 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Richardson Signed
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr J Heard of Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing at Bristol on 10 November 2020 before Employment Judge A Richardson. The written record states that reasons had been given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The only substantive judgment recorded is that the Claimant, Mr R Binns, satisfied the requirement of Rule 10(1)(iv) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1.
No monetary award was recorded and no substantive discrimination, whistleblowing, or dismissal findings appear in the supplied judgment text. The decision is limited to the preliminary issue identified above, and the record notes that the judgment was signed on 11 November 2020 and sent to the parties on 3 December 2020 by e-mail only.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary hearing; the tribunal held that the Claimant satisfied the requirement of Rule 10(1)(iv) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 10(1)(iv) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.