Case 3302468/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr P. Bownes (representative) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3302468/2023
- Decision date
- 14 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hunt Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G Mills brought unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims against the Governing Body of Norwood Primary School and Peterborough City Council. The case was heard at Watford by CVP on 27-28 February and 4 March 2024 before Employment Judge Hunt, with Mr Mills appearing in person and Mr P. Bownes for the respondents.
The written record states that the unfair dismissal claim under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well-founded and was dismissed. It also states that the wrongful dismissal claim was not well-founded and was dismissed.
The judgment note records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless requested in time. No remedy or monetary award is recorded in the extracted decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was found not well-founded and dismissed. The written record does not include the tribunal's oral reasons. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The claim was found not well-founded and dismissed. The written record does not include the tribunal's oral reasons. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.