Case 6007544/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Wood v Sulzer Pumps (UK) Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007544/2024
- Decision date
- 29 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Wood brought a complaint that he had been subjected to detriments on the ground of making a protected disclosure against Sulzer Pumps (UK) Limited. The case was heard by video at Hull on 29 April 2025 before Employment Judge Miller, and the tribunal dismissed the complaint.
The tribunal found that the complaint had not been presented within the applicable time limit and that it was reasonably practicable to do so, so the claim did not succeed on limitation grounds. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The complaint that the claimant was subjected to detriments on the ground of making a protected disclosure was dismissed because it was not presented within the applicable time limit; the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to do so. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.