Tribunal Judge Overton, sitting as an Employment Judge
Members
Ms V NikolaidouMr P LushMr Ross (instructed by Counsel) for respondentDate 5 December 2022
JUDGMENT
[1]The Claimant's claim for unfair dismissal is not well-founded and is dismissed. 2. The Claimant's claim under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 for unfair dismissal - protected disclosure is not well-founded and is dismissed. 3. The Claimant's claim for age-related direct discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 is not well-founded and is dismissed. 4. The Claimant's claim for breach of contract (wrongful dismissal) is dismissed upon withdrawal. 5. The Claimant's claim for age-related harassment under the Equality Act 2010 is struck-out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure for non-payment of a deposit. 6. The Claimant's claim for breach of contract (failure to provide the Claimant with a van) is well-founded and succeeds. 7. The Employment Tribunal has found the Respondent to be in breach of the Claimant's contract of employment in failing to provide the Claimant with a van from Case Number: 3200451/2021 2 02/07/2020 to 16/12/2020 inclusive and the parties, by consent, agree that the remedy for that breach is the sum of £500. Tribunal Judge Overton, sitting as an