Case 2302712/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr William Calver v University of Greenwich — 2024
- Case reference
- 2302712/2022
- Decision date
- 2 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke
- Panel members
- Mr S Corkerton, Mr C Tansley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr William Calver
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr William Calver's claims against the University of Greenwich were heard at London South by video from 17 to 20 June 2024 before Employment Judge O'Rourke, with Mr S Corkerton and Mr C Tansley as the other tribunal members. The written judgment identifies claims of automatic unfair dismissal, detriment on the grounds of protected disclosures, constructive unfair dismissal, and breach of contract in respect of pay in lieu of notice.
The tribunal dismissed all of those claims. The record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days, so the written decision does not set out separate findings on each issue or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal on the grounds of protected disclosures; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment on the grounds of protected disclosures; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in respect of pay in lieu of notice; 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.