Case 3309557/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Collins v Capel Manor College — 2025
- Case reference
- 3309557/2022
- Decision date
- 10 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Panel members
- Mr F Wright, Mr P Hough
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Collins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Reading by CVP on 4, 5, 6, 7 and 10 February 2025 before Employment Judge Anstis with Mr F Wright and Mr P Hough, recorded that Miss J Collins's claims of automatic unfair dismissal, public interest disclosure detriments and indirect disability discrimination were dismissed on withdrawal. The written judgment does not set out any substantive factual findings or reasoning beyond recording those withdrawals.
It then states that the claimant's other claims were dismissed. No monetary award, liability finding with reasons, or apportionment of remedy is recorded in the written judgment, and the note says written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records this as a claim of automatic unfair dismissal dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records this as public interest disclosure detriments dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records this as indirect disability discrimination dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Other | The judgment states that the claimant's other claims were dismissed, but the extracted text does not identify them further. | 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.