Case 2400086/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mark Ridyard v Howden Joinery Group plc — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400086/2023
- Decision date
- 23 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mark Ridyard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed Mr Mark Ridyard's complaint of unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, but it does not set out the factual findings or reasoning for dismissing the complaint.
After judgment, the Claimant left the CVP hearing before submissions on costs and before final orders were made. The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant's conduct fell within Rule 76(1)(a) and (b) and that it was appropriate to make a costs order against him.
No compensation or other remedy for the dismissed complaint was awarded in the written judgment. The Tribunal ordered the Respondent to send a schedule of costs, directed the Claimant to respond and provide means details if quantum was disputed, and reserved any outstanding costs issue to Tribunal Judge Holt.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes the claim as a complaint of unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 76(1)(a) and (b)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.