Case 3314681/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Stuart Wells v Leaside Timber & Builders Merchants Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3314681/2020
- Decision date
- 2 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Members
- Panel members
- Mr R Clifden, Mrs J Hancock
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Stuart Wells
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Stuart Wells's claims were heard remotely at Watford Hearing Centre on 27 and 28 September 2022 before Employment Judge G Tobin sitting with lay members Mr R Clifden and Mrs J Hancock. The tribunal unanimously rejected the claims. It found that Mr Wells was not constructively dismissed under s.95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996 and was not wrongfully dismissed in breach of contract.
The tribunal also rejected the direct sex discrimination claim under s.13 Equality Act 2010. It further held that the non-payment of an annual bonus for the financial year 2019/2020 did not amount to an unauthorised deduction from wages under s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The written record states that proceedings were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant was not constructively dismissed pursuant to s.95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant was not dismissed in breach of contract. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal held that the claimant was not directly discriminated against by the respondent on the grounds of sex, in breach of s.13 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the non-payment of an annual bonus for the financial year 2019/2020 did not amount to an unauthorised deduction from wages under s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.13 Employment Rights Act 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.