Case 2600481/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Branston Potatoes Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2600481/2023
- Decision date
- 9 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Lincoln Heard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Harrison Everton brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Branston Potatoes Limited. The case was heard at Lincoln on 9 August 2023 before Employment Judge Hutchinson sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Miss Sandiford, Counsel.
The tribunal’s written judgment records only the result: the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. No separate remedy was awarded, and no monetary figures are set out in the published written record.
The judgment also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by either party within 14 days. The extracted written record therefore does not contain the tribunal’s detailed findings or the legal reasoning behind the dismissal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states that the claim of unfair dismissal failed and was dismissed. It also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.