Case 1301217/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Kelly v Solidor Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 1301217/2018
- Decision date
- 19 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Kelly
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn reconsideration without a hearing, Employment Judge Camp revoked the judgment dated 18 October 2018 and sent on 19 October 2018. The tribunal then struck out the claimant's claim on the ground that it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The reasons state that the claimant's only possible cause of action was breach of contract, but he had not identified any contractual breach or explained how any breach caused the loss claimed. The tribunal said the claimant's lost earnings were caused by his dismissal, and that it is not a breach of contract to dismiss someone provided notice or payment in lieu of notice is given.
The tribunal also said it is not a breach of contract to dismiss someone unfairly, or in breach of a non-contractual disciplinary procedure, a non-contractual company handbook, or the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures. It further said the reference to 'basic statutory disciplinary procedures' did not assist the claimant, and that acting 'without clear and concise practi[c]e' was not a valid cause of action. The judge concluded that the claim was hopeless as a matter of law.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | On reconsideration without a hearing, the tribunal revoked the judgment dated 18 October 2018 and struck out the claimant's claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. The reasons describe breach of contract as the claimant's only possible cause of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.