Case 2501677/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Marshall v LNER Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2501677/2023
- Decision date
- 19 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram
- Venue
- Newcastle
- Panel members
- Mr R Greig, Mrs D Winter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Marshall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Newcastle Employment Tribunal from 15 April 2024 to 19 April 2024 before Employment Judge Jeram, Mr R Greig and Mrs D Winter. The claimant was represented by Mr P Morgan of Counsel and the respondent by Mr R Rudd of Counsel.
The tribunal dealt with a single claim: that Mr G Marshall had been subjected to detriment on grounds related to his trade union activities contrary to s.146(1)(b) TULR(C)A 1992. The judgment records that this claim was not well founded and was dismissed.
The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The claimant alleged detriment on grounds related to trade union activities contrary to s.146(1)(b) TULR(C)A 1992. The tribunal found the claim was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.146(1)(b) TULR(C)A 1992
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.