Case 3322767/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Captain S Wood, the claimant’s husband For the v Mr L Welsh, consultant PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2023
- Case reference
- 3322767/2021
- Decision date
- 26 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Manley Representation
- Venue
- Reading and
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Captain S Wood, the claimant’s husband For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing on 26 September 2023, Employment Judge Manley considered a claim form presented on 9 November 2021 that contained complaints of unfair dismissal and public interest disclosure detriment. The tribunal held that the rejection of the claim form on 12 January 2022 had been properly made because the names on the claim form and the ACAS Certificate were not the same and the error was not minor.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Part of the claim form containing complaints of unfair dismissal was rejected on 12 January 2022 because the names on the claim form and the ACAS Certificate were not the same and this was not a minor error. The claim was also presented out of time and the claimant did not show that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The complaint described as public interest disclosure detriment was treated as part of the same claim form. It was rejected for the mismatch between the claim form and ACAS Certificate and was also out of time, so the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
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.