Case 1600297/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Jones v Cilfynydd Constitutional Club — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600297/2022
- Decision date
- 12 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge W Brady Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Cardiff on 9 December 2022 before Employment Judge W Brady. The claimant, Mr B Jones, appeared in person and the respondent, Cilfynydd Constitutional Club, was represented by Mr Toner. The tribunal gave its decision orally at the hearing and recorded that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
The tribunal dismissed all three claims. It found that the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. It also dismissed the claimant's breach of contract claim and the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages. No remedy was awarded, and the written judgment does not set out separate findings beyond the stated outcomes.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was 'not well-founded' and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for 'unauthorised deduction from wages' and dismisses it. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.