Case 3315370/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Wells v Russell Finex Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3315370/2020
- Decision date
- 1 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Wells
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written judgment is a very short record. It states that the case was heard at Reading by CVP on 12 and 14 October 2021 before Employment Judge Anstis, sitting alone, with Mr S Wells appearing in person and Russell Finex Limited represented by counsel. The judgment records, in full, that the claimant's claim is dismissed.
No written reasons are set out in the judgment text. The record says that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The GOV.UK case page lists the jurisdiction codes as Health & Safety, Public Interest Disclosure and Unfair Dismissal, but the PDF itself does not identify separate findings on each claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The PDF only states that the claimant's claim is dismissed. This claim type is inferred from the GOV.UK case-page jurisdiction code 'Unfair Dismissal'. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The PDF only states that the claimant's claim is dismissed. This claim type is inferred from the GOV.UK case-page jurisdiction code 'Public Interest Disclosure'. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.