Case 1803574/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Bronze, counsel v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1803574/2021
- Decision date
- 26 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mrs G Fleming, Mr P C Langman
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Bronze, counsel
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat in Leeds on 23 and 24 May 2022 before Employment Judge Cox with lay members Mrs G Fleming and Mr P C Langman. The judgment identifies the parties as Mrs K Burton and Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust.
The extracted text records a single dispositive outcome: the claim failed and was dismissed. The text does not set out the underlying factual findings or legal reasoning in writing.
The judgment also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would only be provided if requested by either party in writing within 14 days of the judgment being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The extracted judgment does not set out the substantive reasons in writing. It records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would be provided only if requested within 14 days. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.