Case 3309842/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Ms A Rawlings, Depot Manager Mrs S Francis, Group Manager — 2022
- Case reference
- 3309842/2022
- Decision date
- 15 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing by Cloud Video Platform at Watford on 24 August 2022 before Employment Judge Bedeau. The claimant, Mr Kevin Brewer, appeared in person. The respondent was represented by Ms A Rawlings, Depot Manager, and Mrs S Francis, Group Manager.
The judgment concerns an application for interim relief under section 128(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal refused the claimant’s application. No monetary award was made.
The written record states that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing. It also notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record. On the face of the record, no substantive findings on the underlying whistleblowing dismissal claim are set out in this document.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal determined an application for interim relief under section 128(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996 and refused it. The written record does not determine the underlying substantive claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.128(1)(a) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.