Case 3313490/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Adam King, Company Director — 2019
- Case reference
- 3313490/2019
- Decision date
- 23 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment concerns Miss S O'Brien's application for interim relief against Ashmore Nursing Home Limited, heard at Bury St Edmunds on 23 April 2019 before Employment Judge Laidler. The respondent was represented by Mr Adam King, Company Director, and the claimant appeared in person.
The tribunal refused the claimant's application for interim relief. The extracted judgment record does not include the tribunal's substantive reasoning for refusing the application.
The written record also states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days. On the text supplied, there is no remedy award and no determination of the underlying public interest disclosure or unfair dismissal claims.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records only that the claimant's application for interim relief was refused. It does not determine the underlying public interest disclosure or unfair dismissal claims in the extracted text. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.