Mr R Evans v Kitchens & Bathrooms (London) Ltd T/a Topmarks: 3306383/2022 & 3309762/2022

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 3306383/2022, 3309762/2022
Mr R EvansClaimantKitchens & Bathrooms (London) Ltd t/a TOPMARKSRespondent
Date 21 February 2023

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.[1]The claim was issued in the Watford Employment Tribunals on 2 August 2022. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The Tribunal declares the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant:a. in relation to unpaid wages from 1 February 2022 to 31 March 2022, the gross sum of £7,500.00; andb. in relation to 12 days accrued holiday, the gross sum of £2,569.15.[3]The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and the respondent is ordered to pay, in lieu of 2 months’ notice, damages to the claimant of £7,500.00.[4]The respondent is in breach of contract by failing to reimburse the claimant agreed expenses, in respect of fuel and material costs, and the respondent is ordered to pay damages to the claimant in the sum of £805.66.[5]The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to award compensation for employer pension contributions that were not paid to your pension provider by the respondent.[6]For the avoidance of doubt, the claimant’s complaints of sex discrimination and race discrimination continue.