Case 3312985/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Edmonds, Counsel For the v Mr. Bownes, solicitor — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312985/2021
- Decision date
- 11 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Mr K Rose, Mr B Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Edmonds, Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr L T Breda de Moraes and Mr G Munro-Henworth brought proceedings against Cambridge City Council in case 3312985/2021. The case was heard at Cambridge over multiple hearing days between 22 and 24 October 2024, 28 to 30 October 2024, 4 November 2024, 7 to 11 April 2025, and 13 May 2025. The tribunal was constituted by Employment Judge Tynan with lay members Mr K Rose and Mr B Smith. Mr M Edmonds appeared for the claimants and Mr Bownes for the respondent.
The written judgment is a short disposal record. It states that the claimants' claims were not well founded and were dismissed. The record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, and it records no award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The published judgment text records only that the claimants' claims were not well founded and dismissed; this claim type is taken from the GOV.UK listing category for the case. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The published judgment text records only that the claimants' claims were not well founded and dismissed; this claim type is taken from the GOV.UK listing category for the case. | 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.