Case 1801460/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Popple, lay representative v Mrs Peckham, consultant — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801460/2020
- Decision date
- 8 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Popple, lay representative
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Leeds on 5 October 2020 before Employment Judge Cox. By consent, the respondent's name was amended to Apple Tree Care Limited.
The only substantive disposal recorded in the extracted judgment is that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. The text does not give reasons for that conclusion, and it does not record any monetary award or other remedy.
Although the listing categories referred to public interest disclosure and unfair dismissal, the extracted judgment text contains no express finding on a whistleblowing claim. On the text supplied, the adjudicated claim recorded in the judgment is unfair dismissal only.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records only that the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. No reasons or remedy are set out in the extracted text. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.