Case 1305010/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Sherman Dubisson v Longbridge Social Club — 2025
- Case reference
- 1305010/2024
- Decision date
- 14 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gidney Appearances
- Venue
- Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Sherman Dubisson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Gidney on 14 January 2025. The claimant, Sherman Dubisson, appeared in person and the respondent, Longbridge Social Club, was represented by a litigation consultant. The judgment was recorded as being by consent.
The only recorded determination was that the claimant presented his claim form on 20 March 2024 and that, accordingly, his claim form for constructive unfair dismissal was presented in time under s111(2) and s207B(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not record any finding on the merits of the underlying dismissal claim, and it does not record any remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Preliminary hearing by consent only determined that the Claim Form for constructive unfair dismissal was presented in time under s111(2) and s207B(4) ERA 1996; no substantive merits outcome was recorded. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s111(2) ERA 1996
- s207B(4) ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.