Case 3323516/2019 · Employment Tribunal
MR DAVID BRYAN v Mears Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3323516/2019
- Decision date
- 30 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Skehan
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mrs Hancock, Mrs Beard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
MR DAVID BRYAN
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written judgment records that the claimant brought two Employment Rights Act 1996 claims against Mears Limited: a claim for automatically unfair dismissal under section 103A and a claim for detriment under section 47B.
The tribunal, constituted by Employment Judge Skehan sitting with members Mrs Hancock and Mrs Beard, found that both claims were not well founded and dismissed them.
The written record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No further findings or remedy were set out in the written judgment provided here.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal claim contrary to s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996; the judgment records that it was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment claim contrary to s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996; the judgment records that it was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.47B 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.