Mr J Mullen v Melian Dialogue Research Ltd: 2210946/2022

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 2210946/2022
Mr J MullenClaimantMr A Williams (Solicitor Advocate)Respondent
Employment Judge Professor A C NealMs S CampbellMr R BaberMs L Veale (instructed by Counsel) for claimantDate 14 February 2024

JUDGMENT

[1]The unanimous judgment of the Tribunal is that:(1) The Claimant was unfairly dismissed for having made protected disclosures.(2) The Claimant was subjected to detriments by the Respondent done on the ground that the Claimant had made protected disclosures.(3) The Claimant’s claim alleging unlawful deduction from wages by reference to a bonus payment is not made out and is dismissed.(4) BY CONSENT it was agreed on Day 3 of the hearing that the Claimant’s claim for unpaid holiday pay is made out and the Respondent is ORDERED to pay to the Claimant the sum of £954.00p.(5) The Claimant’s claim alleging unlawful deduction from wages by reference to outstanding salary due was withdrawn on Day 3 of the hearing and is dismissed. Case No. 2210946/2022 10.2 Judgment - rule 61(6) The Claimant’s claim alleging breach of contract by reference to notice money due was withdrawn on Day 3 of the hearing and is dismissed. Employment Judge Professor A C Neal ______________________________ Date: 14 February 2024[2]JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 28 February 2024 ………………………………………… ………………………………………… FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Note Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.[3]Case No: 2210946/2022 11.6C Judgment – Reconsideration refused – claimant - rule 72 – EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr J Mullen Respondent: Melian Dialogue Research Limited[5]The claimant’s application dated 12 March 2024 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 28 February 2024 is refused.

REASONS

There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked, because the matters raised in the application appear to constitute propositions that the Tribunal has made errors of law which are properly to be addressed by way of appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal under the provisions of Section 21 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.