Case 6015777/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Whelan v City Gate Community Projects and 1 other — 2026
- Case reference
- 6015777/2024
- Decision date
- 1 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr M Whelan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Anstis struck out any claim by Mr M Whelan against City Gate Community Projects and Fareshare Sussex and Surrey other than the claim described at paragraph 5.1.3 of Employment Judge Hawksworth's order dated 5 January 2026. The judgment does not identify the types or number of claims covered by that ruling.
The tribunal found that the claim described at paragraph 5.1.3 was within its jurisdiction. It did not identify that claim, decide its merits, give reasons for the jurisdictional finding, or record any monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out any claim other than the claim described at paragraph 5.1.3 of Employment Judge Hawksworth's order dated 5 January 2026. It does not identify the types or number of claims covered by the strike-out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the claim described at paragraph 5.1.3 of Employment Judge Hawksworth's order was within its jurisdiction. The judgment does not identify that claim's type or determine its merits. | Other | — | — |
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.