Case 1402901/2022 · Employment Tribunal
in Person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1402901/2022
- Decision date
- 4 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner
- Venue
- Southampton
- Panel members
- Mrs C Earwaker, Ms R Goddard
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAfter a hearing at Southampton on 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 March 2024, the tribunal dismissed the claimant’s claim that he had been subjected to a detriment contrary to section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal also dismissed his claim that he had been automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 100 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary award was made because both claims failed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim described as a detriment contrary to section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; the judgment does not identify a more specific taxonomy category. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim was for automatic unfair dismissal contrary to section 100 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.44 ERA 1996
- s.100 ERA 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.