Loading…

M Wright v The Governing Body of Cardinal Newman Catholic School and 1 others — Employment Tribunal 2021 | Tribunal Watch

Case 2300640/2019 · Employment Tribunal

M Wright v The Governing Body of Cardinal Newman Catholic School and 1 other — 2021

Case reference: 2300640/2019
Decision date: 29 April 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge L Burge Representation
Venue: London South

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

M Wright

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At the CVP hearing on 29 April 2021, Employment Judge L Burge permitted the respondents to amend the Grounds of Resistance by adding a plea that some of the alleged protected acts in paragraphs 1(b)(i-xiv) were false allegations made in bad faith, relying on section 27(3) of the Equality Act 2010. The judgment does not set out any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying claims.

The tribunal also corrected the name of the first respondent to "The Governing Body of Cardinal Newman Catholic School". The written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the decision.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The judgment records only a procedural decision to permit amendment of the Grounds of Resistance and a correction to the first respondent's name. It does not determine any substantive employment claim.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

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.

Published on gov.uk under the .

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.