Mr M Bruzdziak v Blinds Ltd: 2407172/2022
JUDGMENT
The respondent’s breach of contract claim is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 15 November 2022 to the respondent and to an organisation called Natwest Mentor Legal Protection (which the Tribunal understands may be the respondent’s representative) the Tribunal informed the respondent that its breach of contract claim was inadequately pleaded and could not be sensibly responded to. The respondent was provided with an opportunity to provide further information including specifying to the amounts claimed and how those amounts have been calculated. .[2]By letter dated 8 December 2022 the Tribunal informed the respondent that its breach of contract claim may be struck out in the event that required detail was not provided.[3]No further information has been received by the respondent.[4]the respondent has not complied with the Orders of the Tribunal as stated in the letters from the Tribunal dated 15 November 2022 and 8 December 2022.[5]The respondent has not actively pursued its breach of contract claim[6]The respondent has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why the breach of contract claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing. The respondent’s breach of contract claim is therefore struck out. Case No:2407172/22 6.3 Strike Out Judgment – claim – part - rule 37 Employment Judge Leach Date: 29 December 2022 The claimant complains of unfair dismissal.[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 Leach Date: 11 January 2023[1]The claimant’s claim that the respondent breached his contract of employment by failing to reimburse him for the expense of charging his electric vehicle at home fails and is dismissed.[2]The claimant was entitled to accrued holiday pay of £90.28 on termination of his employment. However, the claim that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay that holiday pay and other wages due to the claimant fails. The deductions were authorised by the claimant’s contract of employment. _____________________________ Employment Judge McDonald Date: 25 October 2023