Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The decision of the tribunal is that the claimant�s claims against the respondent company should be struck-out on the ground that they have no reasonable prospect of success.
The respondent was represented by Mr J Alghazy Queen�s Counsel (England and Wales), instructed by its In-house Legal Department.
1������� By a claim form presented to the tribunal on 13 May 2013, the claimant, Mr O�Neill, alleged that he had been constructively dismissed by the respondent company, and that he had suffered a detriment as a result of making a public interest disclosure.
2(i)���� The matter had been listed before the Vice President of the Tribunals for a Case Management Discussion on 17 September 2013.� A Record of Proceedings issued on 18 September 2013 and a copy of it is set out at an appendix to this decision.
(ii)����� At that Case Management Discussion the Vice President stressed to both the claimant and the respondent that he found it extremely difficult, on reading the claim form, to extract a coherent or valid claim within the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.