Case 1601152/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Jones v Gwastad Hall Limited (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601152/2022
- Decision date
- 21 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Jones
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs J Jones’s claims against Gwastad Hall Limited (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) were heard at Cardiff via CVP on 8 August 2023 before Employment Judge Leith. The respondent did not attend or have representation.
The Tribunal held that both the protected disclosure detriment complaint and the automatically unfair dismissal complaint were presented outside the applicable time limits. On that basis, it found that it did not have jurisdiction to consider either complaint and dismissed them. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
No remedy was awarded because both claims were dismissed on limitation and jurisdiction grounds.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The complaint of protected disclosure detriment was presented outside the applicable time limits. The Tribunal said it therefore had no jurisdiction to consider it and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The automatically unfair dismissal complaint was presented outside the applicable time limits. The Tribunal said it therefore had no jurisdiction to consider it and dismissed 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.