Mr Y Straiotto v Kiss The Hippo Coffee Ltd: 2300552/2019

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 2300552/2019

Between

Mr Y StraiottoClaimant

Kiss The Hippo Coffee LtdRespondent

Before

Employment Judge Martin

Members

Ms H Bharadia

Mr C Rogers

In person for claimant

Mr A Sendall (instructed by counsel) for respondent

Date 9 December 2020

JUDGMENT

The Claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal is dismissed as the Claimant did not have two years’ and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear this claim.

REASONS

[1]The Claimant was not employed by the Respondent for the two years necessary to bring a claim for unfair dismissal. His dates of employment were from 10 September 2018 to 21 December 2018. Acting Regional Judge Davies ordered at a preliminary hearing on 23 August 2019 that the Claimant sets out how he says the Tribunal can hear his claim of unfair dismissal notwithstanding his length of service.

[2]The Claimant sent an email to the Tribunal on 16 September 2019 explaining that he considered he could rely on the automatically unfair dismissal provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 as he had been dismissed for reasons related to unlawful discriminatory acts.

[3]The provisions relating to automatic unfair dismissal are contained in s98-104 of The Employment Rights Act 1996. This does not include dismissal for reasons related to unlawful discriminatory acts.

[4]Therefore, as the Claimant has less than two years’ service the Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal has no reasonable prospect of success as the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear it and is dismissed. This does not affect the Claimant’s other claims which will proceed to hearing. Employment Judge Martin Date: 03 December 2019 Case No: 2300552/2019/V EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr Y Straiotto Respondent: Kiss the Hippo Coffee Limited Heard on: 7th, 8th and 9th December 2020 by CVP Before: Employment Judge Pritchard Members: Ms H Bharadia Mr C Rogers Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: Mr A Sendall, counsel

[1]The Claimant’s claim of victimisation is not well-founded and is dismissed.

[2]The Claimant’s claim of direct race discrimination is not well-founded and is dismissed. Notes Written reasons 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.