Loading…

Unfair dismissal cases against ’s own submisions he had researched the position online and put forward these claims himself. There was no good reason presented why he could not have done so in his original ET 1. It did appear to the tribunal that there was merit in the — employment tribunal data | Tribunal Watch

Employer × claim type

Unfair dismissal cases against ’s own submisions he had researched the position online and put forward these claims himself. There was no good reason presented why he could not have done so in his original ET 1. It did appear to the tribunal that there was merit in the

Tribunal Watch has indexed 1 case involving unfair dismissal claims against ’s own submisions he had researched the position online and put forward these claims himself. There was no good reason presented why he could not have done so in his original ET 1. It did appear to the tribunal that there was merit in the, out of 1 total case on record for this employer. See also all unfair dismissal cases across every employer.

Unfair dismissal cases: 1
Total awarded: —
Share of employer caseload: 100%

All unfair dismissal cases against ’s own submisions he had researched the position online and put forward these claims himself. There was no good reason presented why he could not have done so in his original ET 1. It did appear to the tribunal that there was merit in the

1 case · chronological

Case ref.	Decided	Jurisdiction	Claimant	Claim types	Award
4110369/2021	15 March 2022	Scotland	(sitting alone) Mr I Major	Unfair dismissal	—

Methodology

This page lists the subset of ’s own submisions he had researched the position online and put forward these claims himself. There was no good reason presented why he could not have done so in his original ET 1. It did appear to the tribunal that there was merit in the's tribunal cases tagged with unfair dismissal in the §4.4 claim-type taxonomy. A single judgment frequently combines multiple claim types, so the same case may appear on more than one claim-type page. Award figures are taken from the remedy section of each judgment where present; cases without a quantified award — because the tribunal only determined liability, or because the remedy hearing is pending — are listed with no award amount. See how the data is built.