Case 2201794/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Silva v Resident Hotels Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201794/2023
- Decision date
- 20 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
- Panel members
- Mrs C Marsters, Ms S Plummer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Silva
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard in London by video on 5 to 8 March 2024 before Employment Judge Kenward, sitting with Mrs C Marsters and Ms S Plummer. The tribunal dismissed Mr W Silva's complaint under section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 that he had been subjected to detriment for making public interest disclosures, finding it was not well-founded.
The tribunal also dismissed his section 103A complaint that he had been unfairly dismissed by reason of making public interest disclosures, again recording that the complaint was not well-founded. The published decision does not set out written reasons beyond the dispositive orders, because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Mr Silva's wrongful dismissal and breach of contract complaints were withdrawn by him and dismissed under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Complaint under section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996, relating to detriment said to arise from making public interest disclosures; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Complaint under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996, relating to dismissal said to be because of making public interest disclosures; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Withdrawn by the Claimant and dismissed under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Withdrawn by the Claimant and dismissed under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.