Case 2501608/2023 · Employment Tribunal
“A” v The Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police HELD at Teesside Justice’s Hearing Centre — 2024
- Case reference
- 2501608/2023
- Decision date
- 8 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought complaints that she had been automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures and had been subjected to detriments for making protected disclosures. The respondent applied for strike out, and the preliminary hearing considered worker or employee status, whether the alleged matters amounted to qualifying disclosures, and whether the claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal found that the claimant was unable to properly identify specific factual information in the alleged disclosures sufficient to show either breach of a legal obligation or miscarriage of justice. It also found that she could not establish a causative link between any alleged protected disclosure and the withdrawal of the offer of employment.
The Tribunal concluded that the complaints of automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures and detriment for making protected disclosures had no reasonable prospect of success. Both claims were struck out and dismissed under Rule 37.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 was struck out under Rule 37 as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Complaint of being subjected to detriments for making protected disclosures under section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 was struck out under Rule 37 as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996
- sections 43A and 43B Employment Rights Act 1996
- sections 43K and 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Chesterton Global Limited v Nurmohamadee
- Rule 2 overriding objective
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.