Case 1803642/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Pearl v Minster Law Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1803642/2019
- Decision date
- 13 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Pearl
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Leeds on 12 and 13 December 2019 before Employment Judge Eeley sitting alone. The claimant, Mr A Pearl, was in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The tribunal gave its decision orally at the hearing, and the written record reflects only the outcomes recorded in the judgment.
The tribunal found that the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal was not well founded and dismissed it. It also dismissed the claimant's claim for a redundancy payment. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
The judgment further records that the claimant's race discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. The decision does not set out substantive findings on the merits of that complaint beyond the withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The claimant's claim for a redundancy payment failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the race discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.