Case 2500360/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Wright v Callie Best and 4 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500360/2022
- Decision date
- 30 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Stuart
- Venue
- Newcastle
- Panel members
- Stuart Moules, Steve Wykes
Parties
6 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr A Wright’s ordinary unfair dismissal claim succeeded. His automatic unfair dismissal claim, based on an alleged protected disclosure, was dismissed, as was his section 47B ERA 1996 detriment claim. The judgment also recorded that, at the date proceedings were started, the respondent was in breach of section 4 ERA 1996.
Remedy was awarded in the total sum of £22,943.73, made up of a basic award of £2,880 and a compensatory award of £20,063.73. The compensatory award included £16,338.85 for lost salary from 6 January 2022 to 15 March 2023, £702.72 for pension loss, £500 for loss of statutory rights, a 10% uplift of £1,754.16 under section 207A TULRCA 1992 for unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures, and £768 under section 38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide updated particulars in contravention of section 4 ERA 1996.
For recoupment purposes, the prescribed period was 6 January 2022 to 15 March 2023 and the prescribed element was £18,745.73. The written judgment states that the oral figures of £20,140.52 for the compensatory award and £23,020.52 for the total award were incorrect, and that the corrected figures are £20,063.73 and £22,943.73.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Ordinary unfair dismissal succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal alleged on grounds of protected disclosure was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment claim under section 47B ERA 1996 was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found a breach of section 4 ERA 1996 at the date proceedings commenced and included a section 38 Employment Act 2002 award of two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £768 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £22,944
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,880
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £20,064
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
6 references- section 47B ERA 1996
- section 48 ERA 1996
- section 4 ERA 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- section 207A TULRCA 1992
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
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.