Case 6004803/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jumaane O Bruce v Ms Helen Brown HELD AT: Manchester — 2024
- Case reference
- 6004803/2024
- Decision date
- 25 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jumaane O Bruce
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the claimant's application for interim relief because the claimant did not attend the hearing on 22 July 2024 and had given no reason for his non-attendance by the time judgment was made at 10:30am.
The Tribunal noted an apparent issue with the named respondent: Ms Helen Brown had been named as the sole respondent, while the claimant's IRF claim document appeared to identify On the Out CIC as his employer. The judgment stated that the claims being brought were whistleblowing detriments and dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
After the hearing, the claimant emailed the Tribunal stating that a resolution had been agreed through ACAS and that he no longer wished to proceed with the case. The Tribunal allowed until 9 August 2024 for ACAS or either party to confirm the position, failing which the claim would be dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment dismissed the claimant's application for interim relief after he did not attend the hearing. The judgment states that the sole claims being brought were whistleblowing detriments and dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996, but the merits of those claims were not determined in this judgment. | 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.