Case 6020986/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Respondent — 2026
- Case reference
- 6020986/2025
- Decision date
- 29 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beever Appearances
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 16 and 17 June 2026, Employment Judge Beever struck out Mr Bookless's complaint of detriment against respondents 1–4 concerning an unsolicited email he received on 12 February 2025. This was identified as detriment (e) in the Agreed List of Issues dated 14 January 2026.
The Tribunal also struck out Mr Bookless's complaint of detriment against respondent 9, identified as detriment (j), concerning the allegation described in the judgment as respondent 9 being determined from around 12 December 2025 to mislead respondents 1–6. The written judgment does not state the grounds for either strike-out; it records that oral reasons were given on 17 June 2026. No monetary remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Detriment (e) in the Agreed List of Issues dated 14 January 2026, concerning an unsolicited email received by Mr Bookless on 12 February 2025 against respondents 1–4. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment (j) in the Agreed List of Issues dated 14 January 2026, against respondent 9 and described as relating to respondent 9 being determined, from around 12 December 2025, to mislead respondents 1–6. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.