Case 2204621/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr A Evans v Prospect CORRECTED — 2022

Case reference: 2204621/2022
Decision date: 13 May 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr A Evans

Respondent

Prospect CORRECTED

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr A Evans, a former Bectu officer and member of Prospect, brought 38 claims under TULRCA ss64-67 arising out of Prospect's disciplinary process after a complaint by Ms Philippa Childs. The disciplinary sub-committee reported on 29 April 2022, rejecting sex discrimination but upholding bullying and harassment, and recommending a five-year suspension with a written apology condition. The NEC adopted the recommendations on 12 May 2022. This hearing on 20 March 2023 considered whether parts of the pleaded case should be struck out under Employment Tribunals Rules 2013 r37(1)(a).

Claims and outcomes

38 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Trade union	Claim (i): alleged inaccurate notes of the 8 March 2022 sub-committee meeting; not struck out at the preliminary hearing.	Other	—	—
Trade union	Claim (ii): underlying finding in the disciplinary sub-committee report; struck out as an antecedent finding, not an actionable determination under s64.	Struck out	—	—
Trade union	Claim (iii): underlying finding in the disciplinary sub-committee report; struck out as an antecedent finding, not an actionable determination under s64.	Struck out	—	—
Trade union	Claim (iv): underlying finding in the disciplinary sub-committee report; struck out as an antecedent finding, not an actionable determination under s64.	Struck out	—	—
Trade union	Claim (v): underlying finding in the disciplinary sub-committee report; struck out as an antecedent finding, not an actionable determination under s64.	Struck out	—	—
Trade union	Claim (vi): underlying finding in the disciplinary sub-committee report; struck out as an antecedent finding, not an actionable determination under s64.

Legal tests applied

8 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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.