Case 2409628/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T Jarman v Mark Thompson Transport Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2409628/2020
- Decision date
- 5 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Panel members
- Mrs L Heath, Ms P Owen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T Jarman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Manchester on 22-23 July 2021, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by a solicitor. In its written judgment, the tribunal recorded that the claimant's complaints of detriment contrary to section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and unfair dismissal contrary to section 100 of that Act were not well-founded.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim in full. The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so the published decision contains the outcome but not a detailed written analysis of the findings. No award or other remedy is recorded in the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaint of detriment contrary to section 44 ERA 1996; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Unfair dismissal complaint under section 100 ERA 1996; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.44 ERA 1996
- s.100 ERA 1996
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.