Case 1601100/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Allen v Dunbia Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601100/2018
- Decision date
- 25 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vernon Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Allen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 21 November 2019 before Employment Judge Vernon, the tribunal held that the near miss form dated 11 April 2018 was a protected disclosure within the meaning of section 43A Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal did not decide at that hearing whether the protected disclosure was the reason for dismissal for the purposes of the automatic unfair dismissal complaint under section 103A; that issue was left to the final hearing.
The tribunal also found that the grievance letter dated 13 April 2018 had not been received by the respondent before the claimant's effective date of termination, so any unfair dismissal case relying on that letter as the reason for dismissal could not succeed. The claimant's complaints of unpaid wages, pleaded as unlawful deductions from wages and breach of contract, were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The application to amend the ET1 dated 12 April 2018 was refused. No monetary award was recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant's complaint of unlawful deductions from wages was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claimant's breach of contract complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.43A Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13 Employment Rights Act 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.