Case 1303756/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Grimson v Crown couriers Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1303756/2022
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harding Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Grimson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It found that Mr B Grimson had been employed by Crown Couriers Ltd for less than two years, so he did not have the qualifying service required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason. On that basis, the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also noted that the claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.