Case 2501823/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Hopper v Kingfisher Media Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2501823/2020
- Decision date
- 11 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Newburn Members
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Hopper
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard Ms S Hopper’s claim against Kingfisher Media Ltd at Newcastle CFCTC by CVP on 10 and 11 May 2021, before Employment Judge Newburn. The written judgment states that the claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded.
The only substantive outcome recorded is that the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The judgment does not set out the tribunal’s detailed reasons in writing because reasons had been given orally at the hearing, and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time by a party.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the claim under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally; this written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.