Case 3331560/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ryan Burgess v Whitbread Group plc — 2019
- Case reference
- 3331560/2018
- Decision date
- 17 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ryan Burgess
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claimant, Ryan Burgess, brought proceedings against Whitbread Group Plc under case number 3331560/2018.
Employment Judge Smail dismissed the proceedings following the claimant's withdrawal of the claim. The judgment contains no adjudicated findings on the merits and no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The listed categories indicate this claim type, but the judgment itself does not separately identify or adjudicate individual claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The listed categories indicate this claim type, but the judgment itself does not separately identify or adjudicate individual claims. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The listed categories indicate this claim type, but the judgment itself does not separately identify or adjudicate individual claims. | Withdrawn | Sexual orientation | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the proceedings are dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The listed categories indicate this claim type, but the judgment itself does not separately identify or adjudicate individual claims. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.