Case 1403254/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Ian Rankin v Eagle Freight Terminal Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403254/2020
- Decision date
- 12 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Ian Rankin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Ian Rankin's claims against Eagle Freight Terminal Ltd were heard at Southampton on 24 and 25 May 2021 before Employment Judge Rayner. The written record identifies two statutory claims: that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that he was automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 100A Employment Rights Act 1996.
Both claims were dismissed. The record does not set out the tribunal's substantive reasons in writing; it states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent to the parties. No monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996. Dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed contrary to section 100A Employment Rights Act 1996. Dismissed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.