Mr D Passmore v Bodycombe Logistics Ltd: 1403900/2019
JUDGMENT
The complaint that the claimant was unfairly dismissed is struck out.REASONS
[2]Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years service to make an unfair dismissal complaint.[3]The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years.[4]Therefore, the claimant is not entitled to bring such a complaint.[5]The claimant has failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out.[6]Accordingly, the complaint of unfair dismissal is struck out. The claimant’s other complaints are not affected by this judgment. Employment Judge Roper Date: 31 December 2019 Case No: 1403900/2019 (Code V) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Mr D Passmore Respondent Bodycombe Logistics Limited (in voluntary liquidation) Heard at: Bristol On: 18 August 2020 (by cloud video platform) Before: Employment Judge Goraj Representation The Claimant: in person The Respondent: did not attend[1]The claimant’s complaint of disability discrimination is dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant.[2]The claimant’s complaint of wrongful dismissal (in respect of notice) has been relisted for hearing on 8 September 2020 (one hour by cloud video platform) as separately notified. Employment Judge Goraj Date: 19 August 2020 As reasons for the Judgment were announced orally at the Hearing written reasons shall not be provided unless they are requested by a party within 14 days of the sending of this Judgment to the parties. Online publication of judgments and reasons The Employment Tribunal (ET) is required to maintain a register of all judgments and written reasons. The register must be accessible to the public. Case No: 1403900/2019 (Code V) It has recently been moved online. All judgments and reasons since February 2017 are now available at: https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions The ET has no power to refuse to place a judgment or reasons on the online register, or to remove a judgment or reasons from the register once they have been placed there. If you consider that these documents should be anonymised in anyway prior to publication, you will need to apply to the ET for an order to that effect under Rule 50 of the ET’s Rules of Procedure. Such an application would need to be copied to all other parties for comment and it would be carefully scrutinised by a judge (where appropriate, with panel members) before deciding whether (and to what extent) anonymity should be granted to a party or a witness. Case no 1403900.2019 (Code P) 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Mr D Passmore Respondent Bodycombe Logistics Limited (in voluntary liquidation) Employment Judge Goraj CONSENT JUDGMENT The JUDGMENT of the tribunal is that: - By consent, the claimant is awarded, and the respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant, the sum of £393.46 in damages for breach of contract in respect of the claimant’s contractual entitlement to one week’s notice. Employment Judge Goraj Date: 22 September 2020 Judgment sent to Parties: 28 September 2020 FOR THE OFFICE OF THE TRIBUNALS Case no 1403900.2019 (Code P) 2 Online publication of judgments and reasons The Employment Tribunal (ET) is required to maintain a register of all judgments and written reasons. The register must be accessible to the public. It has recently been moved online. All judgments and reasons since February 2017 are now available at: https://www.gov.uk/employmenttribunal- decisions The ET has no power to refuse to place a judgment or reasons on the online register, or to remove a judgment or reasons from the register once they have been placed there. If you consider that these documents should be anonymised in anyway prior to publication, you will need to apply to the ET for an order to that effect under Rule 50 of the ET’s Rules of Procedure. Such an application would need to be copied to all other parties for comment and it would be carefully scrutinised by a judge (where appropriate, with panel members) before deciding whether (and to what extent) anonymity should be granted to a party or a witness