Case 1402683/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr A Seal v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited — 2023

Case reference: 1402683/2022
Decision date: 14 December 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gray
Panel members: Ms Barrett, Mrs Skillin

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr A Seal

Respondent

Network Rail Infrastructure Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal gave a unanimous liability-only judgment after a video hearing at Southampton from 20 to 24 November 2023. It dismissed the complaints of detriment on the grounds of making a protected qualifying disclosure and automatic unfair dismissal for the reason, or principal reason, of making a protected qualifying disclosure.

The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment records that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the stated period.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Whistleblowing	The complaints of detriment on the grounds of making a protected qualifying disclosure and automatic unfair dismissal for the reason, or principal reason, of making a protected qualifying disclosure failed and were dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The complaint of unfair dismissal succeeded. The judgment was liability only.	Upheld	—	—
Wrongful dismissal	The complaint of wrongful dismissal succeeded. The judgment was liability only.	Upheld	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.