Case 3323508/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss G Petrou v Partner Retail Services Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3323508/2019
- Decision date
- 8 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Welch
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
- Panel members
- Mrs K Knapton, Mr K Mizon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss G Petrou
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard Miss Petrou's claims remotely via CVP over 22, 23, 24 and 26 August 2022, with 25 August 2022 spent in chambers. The panel comprised Employment Judge K Welch, Mrs K Knapton and Mr K Mizon. The written record states that the Tribunal's unanimous decision was that the claimant's claims for automatic unfair dismissal, detriment on the ground that she had made protected disclosures, and breach of contract were not well founded and failed.
The record indicates that oral reasons were given at the hearing. It does not set out detailed written findings or any monetary award, and it notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal claim based on protected disclosures. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment claim on the ground that the claimant had made protected disclosures. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.