Case 1806293/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Stonys v Myers Group 1959 Limited Heard: By CVP — 2025
- Case reference
- 1806293/2024
- Decision date
- 23 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Panel members
- Ms Y Fisher, Mr K Lannaman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Stonys
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge JM Wade, Ms Y Fisher and Mr K Lannaman, heard the case by CVP on 21 to 23 July 2024. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The judgment records a unanimous decision.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's race discrimination complaints. It also dismissed the claimant's protected disclosure detriment complaint, recording that it was not well founded.
The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint was likewise found not well founded and dismissed. The extracted judgment does not set out any remedy, and no monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's complaints of race discrimination were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as a complaint of protected disclosure detriment and says it was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal was not well founded and dismissed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.