Case 3300618/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Wilkinson Turnbull v The Principal and Fellows of Mansfield College in the University of Oxford — 2024
- Case reference
- 3300618/2024
- Decision date
- 24 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Wilkinson Turnbull
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment on partial withdrawal dated 24 June 2024. The tribunal recorded that the complaints of indirect discrimination, wrongful dismissal in respect of notice pay, and failure to consult on redundancy/restructuring were dismissed because the claimant withdrew them.
The extracted text also records the claimant's acceptance that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear a complaint of failure of duty of care. The judgment says this dismissal judgment did not affect the claimant's other complaints, which were continuing to a final hearing.
No monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaint of indirect discrimination was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant; the extracted text does not state the protected characteristic. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Wrongful dismissal claim in respect of notice pay was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Complaint of failure to consult on redundancy/restructuring was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The claimant accepted that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint of failure of duty of care. | Other | — | — |
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.