Case 6013763/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Greenhalgh v Vamos Kitchen Limited PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013763/2024
- Decision date
- 22 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Greenhalgh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing at Leeds on 21 July 2025 before Employment Judge Shepherd. The claimant, Mr J Greenhalgh, appeared in person. For the respondent, Vamos Kitchen Limited, Mr Edgar appeared as a friend of Sebastien McGowan, the respondent’s managing director.
The tribunal held that Mr Greenhalgh did not do protected acts within the meaning of section 27 of the Equality Act 2010 and did not make protected disclosures within the meaning of section 43A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In light of those findings, the claims brought by the claimant were dismissed. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The tribunal found the claimant did not do protected acts within the meaning of section 27 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found the claimant did not make protected disclosures within the meaning of section 43A Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 27 Equality Act 2010
- section 43A 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.