Mr J Carter v Trustees for Captain N C Pease and Mrs Karen Cotton: 2501535/2018
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s effective date of termination was 27 April 2018 and I am satisfied that the claim was presented within time and that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear his claims of unfair dismissal.[2]The claimant did not have sufficient continuous employment with the Respondent in order to bring a claim of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and that claim is dismissed. Case Number: 2501535/2018 2 of 2[3]The claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 on the ground of the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal was that of the assertion of a statutory right continues and case management orders are made in this respect. Employment Judge Shepherd 19 December 2018 Note: 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. All judgments and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case. Case No. 2501535/2018 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr J Carter Respondent: Trustees for Captain N C Pease and Karen Cotton Heard at: Teesside Justice Centre On: 12 April 2019 Before: Employment Judge S A Shore Mrs C Hunter Mr T Denholm REPRESENTATION: Claimant: Respondent: In Person Mr J Anderson, Counsel[1]The claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal for the reason or principal reason that he alleged that the Respondent had infringed a right of his that is a statutory right, contrary to section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 fails because the Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that he did not make such an allegation.[2]The claimant’s claim that he was unfairly dismissed for the reason or principal reason that he had made use or proposed to make use of trade union services contrary to section 152(1)(ba) of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 fails because the Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that he was not a member and had not proposed that he would become a member of a trade union and was only assisted by a trade union official after the date he resigned.[3]The respondent’s application for costs is refused. The Tribunal found that the allegations that the claimant had acted unreasonably as alleged by the respondent were proven on the balance of probabilities. The claimant left the hearing before details of his assets and income could be determined, despite Case No. 2501535/2018 2 being advised that an order could be made in his absence, but the Tribunal decided that as the claimant was a litigant in person and clearly struggled with the legal concepts involved, and had made allegations that had to be tested in Tribunal, it would use its discretion and not make any order.