Case 1403688/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Massa v The Salvation Army Trustee Company — 2022
- Case reference
- 1403688/2021
- Decision date
- 18 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Massa
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Massa brought a claim for constructive unfair dismissal arising from employment with the Salvation Army Trustee Company between 26 April 2020 and 19 July 2021. The tribunal noted that he did not have two years' continuous service, so the claim would ordinarily be outside jurisdiction unless it could arguably fall within an automatic unfair dismissal exception.
At the preliminary hearing, the claimant described complaints that he had been required to work in an unsafe environment, with alleged failures to provide protective equipment, risk assessments, supervision or training, and that he later contracted hepatitis B. The tribunal said that any claim that the respondent negligently or in breach of duty caused hepatitis B was a personal injury claim, which would fall to be brought in the County Court rather than the employment tribunal.
The tribunal accepted that the workplace allegations, if proved, could potentially amount to a fundamental breach of contract capable of supporting constructive dismissal, but only if the two-year service requirement were met. It then considered whether the case could arguably fall within s.100 Employment Rights Act 1996 or s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996. The judge concluded that the claimant was not alleging any detriment because he raised the matters by grievance or as a protected disclosure, and he had not been expressly dismissed for doing so.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the case was a standard constructive unfair dismissal claim requiring two years' service. Because the claimant did not have that service, the tribunal had no jurisdiction and dismissed the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Claim brought as constructive unfair dismissal; dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal found it had no jurisdiction due to less than two years' continuous service and no arguable automatic unfair dismissal exception. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.100 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- two years' continuous service requirement
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.