Case 1402245/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Reeves v Slee Blackwell Solicitors LLP — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402245/2022
- Decision date
- 3 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Reeves
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy an email dated 1 September 2022, the tribunal gave Mrs P Reeves an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why her complaints of unfair dismissal and breach of contract in respect of notice should not be struck out. The tribunal identified two reasons for possible strike out: first, that she did not have two years' service and therefore the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear an unfair dismissal complaint; and second, that she was not an employee of the respondent and could not pursue a breach of contract claim in the Employment Tribunal.
Mrs Reeves did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out both the unfair dismissal complaint and the complaint of breach of contract in respect of notice. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the claimant did not have two years' service, so it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant did not make sufficient written representations or request a hearing in response to the proposed strike out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal said the claimant was not an employee of the respondent and could not therefore pursue a breach of contract complaint before the Employment Tribunal. The claim was struck out together with the unfair dismissal complaint. | 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.