Case 1401315/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Wareing (Counsel) For the v Mr P Chadwick (Consultant) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1401315/2019
- Decision date
- 16 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Wareing (Counsel) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Gracewell Healthcare 1 Limited. The hearing took place at Southampton on 16 September 2019 before Employment Judge Gray, with Mr P Wareing of counsel appearing for the claimant and Mr P Chadwick appearing for the respondent.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint because it had not been brought within three months of the effective date of termination, as required by s.111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not record any determination on the substantive fairness of the dismissal.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was dismissed because it was not brought within three months of the effective date of termination, as required by s.111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal did not determine the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.111(2) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.