Case 3303837/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person. For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3303837/2024
- Decision date
- 24 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grahame Anderson
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person. For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Cambridge on 20-22 May 2025 before Employment Judge Grahame Anderson. The claimant, Mr P. Dudley, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr P. Morgan. The written judgment records two claims: ordinary unfair dismissal under section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A of the same Act.
Both claims were found not well founded and were dismissed. The published decision does not set out the tribunal's factual reasoning, because reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons were not provided in the written record of decision. The judgment therefore records the outcomes only and does not include any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim under Employment Rights Act 1996, s.94; found not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal claim under Employment Rights Act 1996, s.103A; found not well founded. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.