Case 1306333/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr I Moss, Employee Relations Partner — 2021
- Case reference
- 1306333/2020
- Decision date
- 7 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hughes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a telephone preliminary hearing for case management before Employment Judge Hughes on 6 April 2021. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr I Moss, Employee Relations Partner. The judgment records that the claimant had insufficient service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, so the tribunal found there was no jurisdiction to hear that claim and dismissed it.
The tribunal also dismissed the claimant’s breach of contract claim because it had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment does not record any compensation or other monetary award. It states that there would be an open preliminary hearing on 19 May 2021 to determine the claimant’s application to amend and the respondent’s application for a deposit order.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claimant had insufficient service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.