Claimant v Knightsbridge Court Management Company Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair, though specific reasons were given orally only. The claimant succeeded on this claim as confirmed in the judgment.
The tribunal did not uphold the claim for whistleblowing detriment, finding that the claimant had not established the necessary elements to support this claim.
The tribunal rejected the claim for automatic unfair dismissal, finding that the dismissal did not meet the criteria for an automatically unfair reason under the Employment Rights Act.
Facts
The claimant, Mr Adam Marzec, was dismissed by Knightsbridge Court Management Company Limited. He brought claims for unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal relating to whistleblowing, and whistleblowing detriment. The case proceeded to an 8-day full merits hearing where the claimant represented himself and the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal upheld the claim for ordinary unfair dismissal, finding the dismissal was unfair. However, the tribunal rejected both the automatic unfair dismissal claim and the whistleblowing detriment claim, concluding the claimant had not established the necessary elements for these claims. Reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Practical note
A claimant may succeed on ordinary unfair dismissal while failing to establish automatic unfair dismissal or whistleblowing claims where the evidential thresholds for protected disclosures are not met.
Case details
- Case number
- 2211437/2022
- Decision date
- 8 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 8
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- property management
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No