Case 2500559/2023 · Employment Tribunal
B Wilson v Elpha Lodge Residential Care Home Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500559/2023
- Decision date
- 17 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Dempsey
- Panel members
- S Carter, J Maugham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
B Wilson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent conceded that the claimant had made four protected disclosures, including reports about a resident allegedly being put in a headlock, a resident being left in his room without stimulation, and the absence of a risk assessment. The tribunal considered the central liability issue to be whether the reason or principal reason for dismissal was the protected disclosures.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed contrary to section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It indicated that the compensatory element of any award would be reduced by 50% to reflect the prospect that the claimant's employment could have ended fairly or otherwise within the following 18 months, but made no reduction for contributory fault.
On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found that the claimant had not committed gross misconduct. It held that the matters relied on by the respondent did not objectively justify summary dismissal in the circumstances, and that the claimant was entitled to one week's notice pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed contrary to section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. This was a liability judgment; remedy was to be determined later if not agreed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was not guilty of gross misconduct and was entitled to one week's notice pay. The amount was not quantified in the judgment text provided. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti
- Abernethy v Mott Hay and Anderson
- section 86 Employment Rights Act 1996
- gross misconduct
- implied term of trust and confidence
- contributory fault
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.