Case 3200852/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Napier v Independent Office for Police Conduct — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200852/2022
- Decision date
- 2 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Beyzade Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs B K Saund, Ms M Daniels
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms P Napier
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at East London Hearing Centre, sitting before Employment Judge B Beyzade with members Mrs B K Saund and Ms M Daniels, heard Ms P Napier's claims over multiple hearing dates in January and February 2024. In its unanimous judgment dated 2 February 2024, it held that her constructive unfair dismissal complaint under sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded and dismissed it.
The tribunal also dismissed her separate constructive unfair dismissal complaint brought under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It further dismissed her complaint that she suffered detriments on the ground that she made protected disclosures under sections 47B and 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The extracted judgment contains only the dispositive part of the decision and does not set out detailed reasons or any monetary award. It records that the additional hearing dates listed for 17 April 2024 and 3 July 2024 were vacated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal pursuant to sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal pursuant to section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment complaints on the ground that the claimant made protected disclosures pursuant to sections 47B and 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- sections 94 and 98 ERA 1996
- section 103A ERA 1996
- sections 47B and 48 ERA 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.