Case 3313203/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Keenan v And 1 Secomak Limited 2 Mr D Palmer Held be CVP on 10 September 2021 — 2021
- Case reference
- 3313203/2020
- Decision date
- 4 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kurrein Statement
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Keenan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard remotely by CVP on 10 September 2021 before Employment Judge Kurrein. The claimant’s pleaded allegations included that an email sent to David Palmer on 15 April 2020 and a statement given to the police about alleged incidents on 17 and 19 March 2020 were public interest disclosures, and that he had suffered direct age and/or disability discrimination.
The judgment records that those claims were dismissed on withdrawal. No substantive findings on liability or remedy are set out in the written record provided. The notice also states that written reasons would not be provided because the reasons were given orally at the hearing, unless a request was made in time.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The claim concerned allegations that an email to David Palmer on 15 April 2020 and a statement to the police about alleged incidents on 17 and 19 March 2020 were public interest disclosures. The judgment records that it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Pleaded together with disability discrimination as direct age and/or disability discrimination. The judgment records that it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Disability discrimination | Pleaded together with age discrimination as direct age and/or disability discrimination. The judgment records that it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
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.